simpletel
OCI · GHCR.IO/WILLNEWBY/SIMPLETEL-MCP
Query your simpletel OpenTelemetry traces and account usage from a coding agent.
Available components
Last scanned (12 hours ago)
Scores higher than 68% of OCI servers
Category Monitoring and Observability
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security0
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.Unverified
- Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
- Dependency health could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.Unverified
Provenance & Transparency32
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- License check failed: no license is declared. See how to fix → Fail
- Actively maintained (last published 2 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability79
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 437 tokens (~87/item across 5 items; 5 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management73
- Stability observed for 22 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
Unverified: 1 category
A category scored 0 because we could not verify it: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 4 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 3 Nov 26 0
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Stability: 0.63 → unverified ▼ security
- Capabilities: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- 2 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 Oct 26 0
- Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
- 29 Oct 26 0
- Provenance: fail → unverified ▼ security
- 28 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 27 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.40 → unverified ▼ security
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Capabilities: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed oci/ghcr.io/willnewby/simpletel-mcp@20261011.2217.17-3b41fca
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | oci |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
get_signals ~99
Show this team's Golden Signals over a window — throughput, error rate, latency percentiles, per-service breakdown, and saturation — as the JSON document `GET /api/v1/signals` produces.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| service | string | – | exact match on the resource service.name (omit for all services) |
| since | string | – | lookback window such as "1h" or "30m" (default: the server's 1h window) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_trace ~63
Fetch one trace in full — spans, span events, and correlated log records — as the JSON document `simpletel get trace <id> --format json` produces.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| trace_id | string | yes | 32-hex trace id, as returned by get_traces |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_traces ~139
List this team's traces newest-first with filters, as the JSON document `simpletel get traces --format json` produces. Use it to find a failing or slow request, then pass the trace_id to get_trace.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| errors_only | boolean | – | only traces with at least one error span |
| limit | integer | – | maximum number of traces to return |
| min_duration | string | – | minimum trace duration such as "250ms" |
| service | string | – | exact match on the root span's service.name |
| since | string | – | lookback window such as "1h" or "30m" (default "1h") |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
usage ~37
Show the account's plan, month-to-date records, allowance, and spend cap as the JSON document `simpletel usage --format json` produces.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify ~99
Run the `simpletel verify` onboarding check: poll until service <service> has a fresh trace carrying spans from a library instrumentation. Returns the rung report and the exit status the CLI would use (0 verified, 1 deadline miss).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| service | string | yes | service.name expected to be sending fresh, library-instrumented traces |
| timeout | string | – | give up after this long, such as "60s" (default "60s") |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the simpletel MCP server?
simpletel runs locally as a container image, launched with docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/willnewby/simpletel-mcp:20261011.2217.17-3b41fca. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 3 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
oci · ghcr.io/willnewby/simpletel-mcp
claude mcp add willnewby-simpletel -- docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/willnewby/simpletel-mcp:20261011.2217.17-3b41fca
What is the simpletel MCP server?
simpletel is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.willnewby/simpletel. Query your simpletel OpenTelemetry traces and account usage from a coding agent. This page covers its container image (ghcr.io/willnewby/simpletel-mcp).
Is the simpletel MCP server safe to use?
simpletel scores 47 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the simpletel MCP server expose?
simpletel exposes 5 tools: get_traces, get_trace, get_signals, verify, usage. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 437 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the simpletel MCP server still maintained?
simpletel is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.