Should my agent depend on the MCP server io.github.DavidOrpeli/0xhumans-mcp?

Verdict: warn — alive-toolless — usable, but look before you lean on it As of 2026-08-15T11:28:18Z: a dated observation with receipts, not a warranty.

0xHumans Protocol MCP

io.github.DavidOrpeli/0xhumans-mcp

MCP for AI agents: financing, skills, lending on Base

— the operator's own registry description reported

Publisher io.github.DavidOrpeli · first seen 2026-08-12 · endpoint https://0xhumans-mcp-proxy.vercel.app/api/mcp

warn

verdict

alive-toolless

cluster

answers

—

tools served

Dependency rating derived

warn
warn — alive, no tools · kind unknown · V n/a

warn — because answers ●, no confirmed drift in 2 probes ●; not yet checked: harness, truth (0 runs)

Cluster alive-toolless · distinctiveness 0.744 (unusual). Every figure is a percentile or class within the 11,094-server census — see the whole spectrum.

Does it answer? Q1 · observed

answersalive_no_tools

latency65 ms

vs populationtypical

protocolbehind

authopen

Can it be used? Q4 · observed

capabilities0

Did it hold when checked? Q3–Q4 · derived

identitysolo

servers on its host1

verifiabilityunassessed

duplicate inventoryno

drift events0

answers trueno primary

🔏 Signed receipt rr_af5bfcc32a0cb3709c05fb4a · 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, no tools — 2 probes ●evidence ↓

Q2What is it?kind unknown ○ evidence ↓

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

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

Q5What company does it keep?alive-toolless · 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 (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

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 the operator's own registry description — REPORTED, not observed (tools were not visible to the probe). What checking applies to each kind (the full methodology →):

nature	tools	meaning	what checking applies
unclassified	1	not classifiable from its text	Tier-1 only until its tools describe themselves

Tools last seen observed

no tool inventory served

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

2025-03-26

protocol version

—

session model

—

server version

Capabilities: none declared

Drift observed

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

raw probe records

probed (UTC)	outcome	http	ms	protocol
2026-08-14T19:58:59Z	ok	200	65	2025-03-26
2026-08-12T05:34:14Z	ok	200	75	2025-03-26

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/io.github.DavidOrpeli/0xhumans-mcp.svg)](https://robinsaige.com/s/io.github.DavidOrpeli/0xhumans-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