Taproot: AT Protocol MCP
com.atproto-mcp/taproot
Read public AT Protocol profiles, records, threads, backlinks and lexicons. No API key required.
— the operator's own registry description reported
Publisher com.atproto-mcp · first seen 2026-09-13 · endpoint https://mcp.atproto.at/mcp
Dependency rating derived
allow — alive & usable · retrieval-public ● · V1 shows its work ◐
Cluster mid-slow-solo · distinctiveness 0.721 (unusual). Every figure is a percentile or class within the 19,148-server census — see the whole spectrum.
🔏 Signed receipt rr_95ee59d9c42f8c57104cd985 · 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.
● observed · ◐ derived · ○ reported — the verdict synthesizes Q1–Q4; Q5 is context. Methodology →
History observed
Every probe we made, oldest → newest (1 shown, 2026-09-13 → 2026-09-13). 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 (1 events)
| date | type | what changed |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-13 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| retrieval-public | 24 | serves public facts | truth-checkable against a public source — the V-ladder applies in full |
| generative | 1 | creates content | no answer key exists; disclosure + stability checks, never truth verdicts |
| orchestration | 1 | routes other tools | identity + fronted-service disclosure checks (gateway vs costume) |
| predictive | 1 | claims about the future | scoreable only in retrospect — the archive scores yesterday's predictions against today's outcome |
Tools last seen observed
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 A — an agent can pick and call these reliably.
| legibility check | tools passing | ok |
|---|---|---|
| name is clear & specific | 27/27 | ✓ |
| has a description | 27/27 | ✓ |
| description is substantive | 27/27 | ✓ |
| parameters are typed | 27/27 | ✓ |
| parameters are described | 27/27 | ✓ |
27 of 27 tools graded · 27 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 in the Tier-2 trade lane, or not yet checked. Tier-2 re-derives a server's answers against published primary sources — see truth checks.
Protocol conformance observed
Capabilities: prompts resources tools
Drift observed
No confirmed drift on record. Baseline set 2026-09-13; changes appear here after human review.
raw probe records
| probed (UTC) | outcome | http | ms | protocol |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-13T06:12:43Z | ok_tools | 200 | 1513 | 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:
[](https://robinsaige.com/s/com.atproto-mcp/taproot)
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.
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 →