Should my agent depend on the MCP server app.nomadpoint/nomadpoint?

Verdict: allow — rich-solo — safe to depend on As of 2026-09-06T06:21:45Z: a dated observation with receipts, not a warranty.

nomadpoint

app.nomadpoint/nomadpoint

Plan trips and track visa days per traveller across 39,601 entry rules

— the operator's own registry description reported

Publisher app.nomadpoint · first seen 2026-08-21 · endpoint https://gxhdcvoveufbkthhendf.supabase.co/functions/v1/mcp

allow

verdict

rich-solo

cluster

ok_tools

answers

tools served

Dependency rating derived

allow
allow — alive & usable · action ● · V n/a

allow — because answers ●, 42 tools legible (band B) ●, no confirmed drift in 3 probes ●; not yet checked: truth (1 attempts unverifiable, 0 disagreements)

Cluster rich-solo · distinctiveness 0.425 (moderate). Every figure is a percentile or class within the 15,472-server census — see the whole spectrum.

Does it answer? Q1 · observed

answersalive_tools

latency123 ms

vs populationtypical

protocolcurrent

authopen

Can it be used? Q4 · observed

tools42

vs populationhigh

capabilities1

harnessB

Did it hold when checked? Q3–Q4 · derived

identitysolo

servers on its host1

verifiabilityunassessed

duplicate inventoryno

drift events0

answers true0/0 agree

🔏 Signed receipt rr_f81d886279b834cd1cf7859e · ed25519 · key rs-rcpt-2026-08 — this rating is tamper-evident; an agent gets the full signature from check_server and can verify it against the published key.

Q1Does it answer?alive & usable — 3 probes ●evidence ↓

Q2What is it?action ● evidence ↓

Q3Can it be checked?V n/a for this kind ◐evidence ↓

Q4Did it hold?harness B · truth not yet run · no drift ●evidence ↓

Q5What company does it keep?rich-solo · 1 on its host (context, not verdict) ◐evidence ↓

● observed · ◐ derived · ○ reported — the verdict synthesizes Q1–Q4; Q5 is context. Methodology →

History observed

Every probe we made, oldest → newest (3 shown, 2026-08-23 → 2026-09-06). Green answered · amber answered-but-walled · red no useful answer. A gap in our cadence is a gap in coverage, not evidence about the server.

changelog (2 events)

date	type	what changed
2026-08-30	inventory	tools 36 → 42
2026-08-23	outcome	first probe: ok_tools

What kind of tools these are derived

Verification only means something relative to a tool's NATURE — an email-sender has no "true answer", a generator has no answer key. Classification evidence: classified from tool names/descriptions/annotations WE OBSERVED. What checking applies to each kind (the full methodology →):

nature	tools	meaning	what checking applies
action	25	changes the world	no true answer exists; we check the CONTRACT (destructive/read-only/idempotent declarations, error legibility) and never fire real actions
retrieval-public	14	serves public facts	truth-checkable against a public source — the V-ladder applies in full
retrieval-private	2	serves the caller's own data	outside truth-checking is impossible BY NATURE, not by failure — the operator-invited pathway applies
unclassified	1	not classifiable from its text	Tier-1 only until its tools describe themselves

Tools last seen observed

add_passport create_accommodation create_activity create_expense create_flight create_journey create_stay create_visa delete_accommodation delete_activity delete_document delete_expense delete_flight delete_journey delete_stay delete_visa get_budget get_country_info get_journey get_journey_share_link get_me get_visa_status leave_journey list_documents list_expenses list_journey_members list_journeys list_visas remove_journey_member search_airlines search_airports search_cities set_budget set_item_travellers update_accommodation update_activity update_expense update_flight update_journey update_preferences update_stay update_visa

Harness readiness observed

Can an agent's harness pick this tool and call it correctly? Graded on the three things an agent reads — name, description, typed parameters. Band B — usable, with rough edges.

legibility check	tools passing	ok
name is clear & specific	42/42	✓
has a description	42/42	✓
description is substantive	36/42	36/42
parameters are typed	42/42	✓
parameters are described	5/42	5/42

42 of 42 tools graded · 42 with a captured input schema. RS-008, Tier-1 — no domain knowledge, applies to any tool. “Alive” is not the same as “usable”.

Truth checks observed

Not yet confirmed — 1 attempt(s) currently unverifiable (rate limits, walls, or unmappable schemas — never counted against the server) · 0 disagreements.

claim class	key	verdict	primary source
tariff-duty	unmapped	unverifiable	us-hts

Protocol conformance observed

2025-06-18

protocol version

—

session model

1.0.0

server version nomadpoint

Capabilities: tools

Drift observed

No confirmed drift on record. Baseline set 2026-09-06; changes appear here after human review.

raw probe records

probed (UTC)	outcome	http	ms	protocol
2026-09-06T06:11:44Z	ok_tools	200	123	2025-06-18
2026-08-30T06:11:33Z	ok_tools	200	223	2025-06-18
2026-08-23T06:11:25Z	ok_tools	200	134	2025-06-18

Watch or embed this verdict

Operators: put the live verdict in your README — it updates with every census, links back here, and is a dated observation, never a warranty:

[![Robin Saige verdict](https://robinsaige.com/badge/app.nomadpoint/nomadpoint.svg)](https://robinsaige.com/s/app.nomadpoint/nomadpoint)

Depend on it? Subscribe to its change feed — outcome changes and confirmed drift, no account needed. Building on it? The full dossier as JSON — verdict, rating, truth checks, history — stable enough to gate CI on.

← overview

Operator of this server? Everything we hold about it is on this page — free, no account, for anyone. Wrong attribution, stale probe, misclassification? Dispute this record →