NanoTools
io.github.nanotools-x402/nanotools
44 tools for AI agents: Trends, SERP, SEO audits, screenshots, weather, FX, whois, RSS.
— the operator's own registry description reported
Publisher io.github.nanotools-x402 · first seen 2026-09-02 · endpoint https://nano.vodka-24.com/mcp
Dependency rating derived
allow — alive & usable · kind unknown · V n/a
Cluster rich-solo · distinctiveness 0.777 (unusual). Every figure is a percentile or class within the 15,472-server census — see the whole spectrum.
🔏 Signed receipt rr_56b2437b4e45e20929449964 · 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, 2026-09-06 → 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 (1 events)
| date | type | what changed |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-06 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| unclassified | 22 | not classifiable from its text | Tier-1 only until its tools describe themselves |
| computational | 11 | deterministic transforms | self-checkable by re-computation and known-answer tests |
| retrieval-public | 5 | serves public facts | truth-checkable against a public source — the V-ladder applies in full |
| generative | 4 | creates content | no answer key exists; disclosure + stability checks, never truth verdicts |
| action | 2 | changes the world | no true answer exists; we check the CONTRACT (destructive/read-only/idempotent declarations, error legibility) and never fire real actions |
| 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 B — usable, with rough edges.
| legibility check | tools passing | ok |
|---|---|---|
| name is clear & specific | 45/45 | ✓ |
| has a description | 45/45 | ✓ |
| description is substantive | 45/45 | ✓ |
| parameters are typed | 45/45 | ✓ |
| parameters are described | 0/45 | 0/45 |
45 of 45 tools graded · 45 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
1/1 answers agree with the published primary source.
| claim class | key | verdict | primary source |
|---|---|---|---|
| fx-rates | EURUSD | agrees | ecb-fx |
Protocol conformance observed
Capabilities: logging prompts resources 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-06T06:16:42Z | ok_tools | 200 | 333 | 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/io.github.nanotools-x402/nanotools)
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 →