OpenTimeStamps MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to OpenTimeStamps MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceDocument verification MCP server enabling AI agents to verify file authenticity by computing SHA-256 fingerprints locally and checking Bitcoin-anchored proofs via OpenTimestamps.55 npmMIT

Orphographofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents and MCP hosts to anchor file hashes to Bitcoin via OpenTimestamps and verify proofs, ensuring files existed before a given time with privacy-preserving local hashing.MIT- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides real-time Bitcoin blockchain and mempool data to AI clients, allowing access to comprehensive Bitcoin network information through various data tools.314 npm5MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceCryptographic proof of every AI decision. An immutable, verifiable audit trail MCP server.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server enabling AI models to interact with the Nostr network, facilitating note posting and interaction with the freedom of speech protocol.24 npm38MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables AI models to interact with the Nostr network, allowing them to post notes and eventually send Lightning zaps to users.24 npm1MIT
TDQS
Scored across 7 tools
Each tool maps to a distinct step in the OpenTimestamps workflow (hash, stamp, load, info, upgrade, verify, retrieve). The only potential overlap is load_proof vs get_full_proof, but their descriptions distinguish inputs (hex/file vs hash), so confusion is limited.
All tool names use snake_case with a verb-first pattern (calculate_hash, stamp_hash, load_proof, upgrade_proof, verify_proof, etc.). The naming is predictable and consistent across the set.
Seven tools is well-scoped for the OpenTimestamps lifecycle; each operation serves a distinct purpose without redundancy. The count fits comfortably within the recommended 3–15 range.
Core lifecycle operations—hashing, stamping, loading/retrieving proofs, inspecting, upgrading, and verifying—are all covered. A minor gap is the lack of an explicit save/export proof tool, though load_proof and get_full_proof may cover retrieval needs.