Skip to main content
Glama
TheNexusIntel

nexus-mcp

by TheNexusIntel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

nexus-mcp

A Model Context Protocol server for The Nexus — give your AI assistant or agent direct access to U.S. government primary-source records, fact-checks, news search, and standing trackers.

What makes it different: most news/search MCP servers wrap headlines. The Nexus also puts the government record in your agent's hands — court filings, SEC/EDGAR, OFAC sanctions, FEC, lobbying disclosures, DOJ and FDA enforcement, and more — cross-referenced by entity and linked to the source document. Every result is primary-source-linked. Attribution to The Nexus is required when using the data.

Tools

Tool

What it does

nexus_record_lookup

Cross-source U.S. public-record footprint for a person or organization — courts, SEC/EDGAR, OFAC sanctions, FEC, lobbying, DOJ, FDA, and more — with per-document links and a connection teaser.

nexus_factcheck

Qualified verdict + rationale + linked citations for a claim. Cached checks are instant & free; novel checks are rate-limited on the free tier.

nexus_search

Full-text search across The Nexus news corpus (free tier: last 30 days).

nexus_tracker

Latest weekly synthesis from china-watch (PRC-linked activity), underground (organized crime), graft (public corruption), or grift (consumer fraud).

Related MCP server: whetstone-mcp

Setup

  1. Get a free, email-verified API key at https://thenexus.news/developers.

  2. Install: npm install -g @thenexusintel/mcp (or clone and npm install).

  3. Add the server to your MCP client.

Claude Desktop / Claude Code

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "nexus": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@thenexusintel/mcp"],
      "env": { "NEXUS_API_KEY": "nxs_live_your_key_here" }
    }
  }
}

(Or point command/args at a local node /path/to/server.js.)

Free tier

Unlimited record / search / tracker calls and unlimited cached fact-checks; a small number of novel fact-checks per day. Higher volume and entity-graph depth are on the paid tier — see /developers.

Environment

Var

Required

Default

NEXUS_API_KEY

yes

—

NEXUS_API_BASE

no

https://thenexus.news

Security note: only set NEXUS_API_BASE to a host you trust — it's where your key is sent. Leave it unset to use The Nexus.

License

MIT

Available Tools

4 tools
nexus_factcheckFact-check a claim against The NexusA

Check a factual claim against The Nexus's news corpus and public records. Returns a qualified verdict (Supported / Partly true / Misleading / Disputed / Unsupported / Contradicted / Not enough evidence), a rationale, a confidence level, and linked citations. Already-checked claims return instantly and free; novel checks are rate-limited on the free tier. Source: The Nexus.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
claimYesThe claim to check, in plain language

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (verdict, rationale, confidence, citations) and the caching/rate-limiting behavior. This gives the agent sufficient understanding of the tool's execution characteristics.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: the first defines purpose and output, the second adds constraints, the third states source. No redundant words.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, what it returns, and behavioral nuances (caching, rate limits). It is complete for an agent to decide whether and how to invoke it.

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 coverage is 100% (one parameter 'claim' is described as 'The claim to check, in plain language'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 specifies a precise verb ('check'), a concrete resource ('The Nexus's news corpus and public records'), and the unique output (verdict types). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like nexus_search or nexus_record_lookup.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use the tool ('check a factual claim') and hints at constraints (instant for cached, rate-limited for novel). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives for non-fact-check queries.

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

nexus_record_lookupLook up an entity's public recordA

Cross-source U.S. public-record footprint for a person or organization — courts, SEC/EDGAR, OFAC sanctions, FEC, lobbying, DOJ, FDA, and more — with document links and a connection teaser. Use this to answer 'what's on the record for X?'. Source: The Nexus.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entityYesPerson or organization name, e.g. 'Tesla'

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results include document links and a connection teaser, and that the source is U.S. public records. It does not detail pagination or error handling, but for a read-only lookup this is adequate.

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 concise, using three sentences to convey purpose, scope, and usage guidance. No wasted words, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the sources, output contents (documents, teaser), and usage hint. It lacks details on return format or pagination, but is sufficient for the complexity level.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear parameter description. The tool description reinforces that the entity is a person or organization but adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool looks up a U.S. public-record footprint for a person or organization, listing specific sources (courts, SEC/EDGAR, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like nexus_search (general search) by focusing on public records.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this to answer "what's on the record for X?"', providing a clear use case. It does not mention when not to use or compare to siblings, but the usage context is well-defined.

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

nexus_trackerLatest from a Nexus trackerB

The latest weekly synthesis from one of The Nexus's standing trackers: china-watch (PRC-linked activity), underground (organized crime / illicit economy), graft (public corruption), grift (consumer fraud & scams). Source: The Nexus.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesWhich tracker to read

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the tool returns a 'weekly synthesis', but omits details on authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or potential errors. Minimal transparency beyond the basic function.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and the available trackers. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity with a single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and the options. However, it could mention the output format or that it returns text, but overall it is sufficient for its purpose.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema already describes the parameter 'name' with an enum and a brief description. The tool description adds significant value by explaining what each tracker covers (e.g., 'china-watch (PRC-linked activity)'), which exceeds the schema's minimal description and aids correct selection.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the latest weekly synthesis from one of four named Nexus trackers, specifying the verb 'get' and the resource 'weekly synthesis'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like nexus_factcheck, nexus_record_lookup, or nexus_search, though their names suggest different functions.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It neither states prerequisites nor gives examples of appropriate use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and description.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 4 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observednexus_factcheck
    • First observednexus_record_lookup
    • First observednexus_search
    • First observednexus_tracker
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A4/5.0

Scored across 4 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function: fact-checking claims, searching public records, searching articles, and retrieving weekly trackers. There is no overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'nexus_<noun>' snake_case pattern, with descriptive names like factcheck, record_lookup, search, and tracker.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is well-scoped for a news and public records server, covering fact-checking, record lookup, search, and topic tracking without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core workflows but lacks direct article retrieval by ID or more granular record types, which are minor gaps for a news corpus and public records server.

Maintenance

ActivityStale
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers