The MCP Census

Run MCP server preflight

census_preflight

Evaluate one exact MCP server under a documented built-in install policy. Returns PASS, REVIEW, or BLOCK with evidence reasons, freshness, digests, and explicit limits. This is a first gate, not a security audit. refresh=if_stale requires x-api-key.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "server_name": "<server_name>"
    },
    "name": "census_preflight"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`refresh`	No		never
`policy_id`	No		builtin:baseline
`server_name`	Yes	Exact canonical Census server name

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`facts`	Yes
`policy`	Yes
`meaning`	Yes
`reasons`	Yes
`audit_id`	Yes
`decision`	Yes
`limitations`	Yes
`server_name`	Yes
`valid_until`	Yes
`audit_signed`	Yes
`evaluated_at`	Yes
`facts_digest`	Yes
`decision_scope`	Yes
`engine_version`	Yes
`decision_input_digest`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the return verdicts, evidence reasons, freshness, digests, explicit limits, and the x-api-key requirement for refresh=if_stale. It does not explain why the tool is not read-only despite readOnlyHint=false, but the annotations and auth note provide enough behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is four tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return shape, followed by scope exclusion and auth caveat. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has an output schema, yet the description still usefully summarizes verdicts and evidence fields. It covers the key scope, auth, and limit context, though it could more fully explain the policy_id options and when each policy should be selected.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, so the description should compensate more for parameters. It adds useful meaning for refresh=if_stale via the x-api-key requirement, but policy_id is only implied by 'built-in install policy' and is not explained beyond the schema enum.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: evaluate one exact MCP server under a built-in install policy. It names the verdict outputs and clearly positions the tool as a first gate, which separates it from siblings like census_policy_list and census_audit_config.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states when to use the tool by framing it as a first gate and explicitly says it is not a security audit, which is a useful exclusion. However, it does not name the alternative tool to use for a deeper security audit, leaving that inference to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All The MCP Census tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?