Should my agent depend on the MCP server dev.torify/japanese-locale-mcp?

Verdict: allow — mid-slow-solo — safe to depend on As of 2026-08-15T11:28:18Z: a dated observation with receipts, not a warranty.

Torify — Japan Locale APIs for AI Agents

dev.torify/japanese-locale-mcp

39 Japanese locale APIs — wareki, NTA invoice, 法人番号, postal, romanization, kanji-kana (Workers AI).

— the operator's own registry description reported

Publisher dev.torify · first seen 2026-08-12 · endpoint https://torify-mcp.torify.workers.dev

allow

verdict

mid-slow-solo

cluster

ok_tools

answers

tools served

Dependency rating derived

allow — mid-slow-solo — safe to depend on

Cluster mid-slow-solo · distinctiveness 0.361 (moderate). Every figure is a percentile or class within the 11,094-server census — see the whole spectrum.

Reach — can an agent get to it?

answersalive_tools

latency554 ms

vs populationslow

protocolcurrent

authopen

Use — can it use it?

tools24

vs populationmid

capabilities1

harnessA

Trust — can it rely on it?

identitysolo

servers on its host1

verifiabilityunassessed

duplicate inventoryno

drift events0

answers trueno primary

🔏 Signed receipt rr_61c935fb76bac73d18b155e2 · 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.

Tools last seen

company.fullProfile geo.geocode geo.reverseGeocode houjin.lookup invoice.companyProfile invoice.validate invoice.verify kanji.toKana law.search name.romanize postal.lookup torify_company.fullProfile torify_geo.geocode torify_geo.reverseGeocode torify_houjin.lookup torify_invoice.companyProfile torify_invoice.validate torify_invoice.verify torify_kanji.toKana torify_law.search torify_name.romanize torify_postal.lookup torify_wareki.convert wareki.convert

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	24/24	✓
has a description	24/24	✓
description is substantive	24/24	✓
parameters are typed	24/24	✓
parameters are described	24/24	✓

24 of 24 tools graded · 24 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

2025-06-18

protocol version

—

session model

0.2.0

server version torify

Capabilities: tools

Drift

No confirmed drift on record. Baseline set 2026-08-14; changes appear here after human review.

History observed

Every probe we made, oldest → newest (2 shown, 2026-08-12 → 2026-08-14). 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
2026-08-12	outcome	first probe: ok_tools

raw probe records

probed (UTC)	outcome	http	ms	protocol
2026-08-14T19:58:46Z	ok_tools	200	554	2025-06-18
2026-08-12T05:33:59Z	ok_tools	200	476	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/dev.torify/japanese-locale-mcp.svg)](https://robinsaige.com/s/dev.torify/japanese-locale-mcp)

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