InferenceView MCP
# InferenceView MCP
Use InferenceView from any Model Context Protocol client to check an x402/MCP
resource before paying it or to fact-check a claim before acting on it.
The local MCP process keeps your wallet key on your machine and pays the remote
InferenceView API over x402. The key is never sent to InferenceView.
## Tools
- `verify_transaction` — returns risk, recommendation and evidence about an
x402 resource before payment. Current price: $0.01 USDC on Base.
- `factcheck` — returns a supported/refuted/mixed/unverifiable verdict with
sources. Current tiers: $0.05, $0.10 and $0.25 USDC on Base.
Always trust the live x402 challenge over prices copied into documentation.
## Install
```bash
npm install
```
Configure your MCP client:
```json
{
"mcpServers": {
"inferenceview": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/absolute/path/to/inferenceview-mcp/shim.mjs"],
"env": {
"EVM_PRIVATE_KEY": "your-funded-base-wallet-key"
}
}
}
}
```
The wallet needs Base USDC. Keep the private key in your client's secret store;
never commit it or paste it into an issue.
## Machine-readable interfaces
- Product: https://inferenceview.com/
- OpenAPI: https://verify.inferenceview.com/openapi.json
- Hosted shim source: https://verify.inferenceview.com/shim.mjs
- Live service health: https://verify.inferenceview.com/health
## Evidence boundary
VERIFY preflight and x402 payment are live. This repository does not claim
customer deployment of InferenceView's broader postflight platform, material
revenue, endorsements or marketplace partnerships.
Copyright © Intelix Systems LLC. No license is granted beyond running this MCP
client to access the documented InferenceView service.
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools address entirely different verification domains: one assesses transaction risk for x402/MCP resources, while the other evaluates the veracity of factual claims. There is no overlap in inputs, operations, or outputs, making misselection impossible.
Both tool names use lowercase and avoid special characters, but verify_transaction follows a clear verb_noun pattern while factcheck is a single compound word. This minor stylistic mismatch is easy to read and does not hinder predictability.
With only two tools, the server feels somewhat thin. However, each tool covers a distinct, substantive verification use case, and the narrow focus justifies the small count, making it acceptable if not ideal.
The server's implied domain is pre-action verification, and the two tools cover the primary needs: verifying transactions and verifying facts. No critical gaps are apparent within this scope, though a broader verification suite might include other resource types.