Exactlane Preflight MCP Server

Before relying on an MCP capability, answer one question about it: does this exact revision satisfy the requirements your workflow declares? Call it for new work, after a dependency changes, after your own requirements change, or when an integration has already failed and you need to know whether the capability is why (the public triggers are NEW_WORK, DEPENDENCY_CHANGE, REQUIREMENTS_CHANGE, INTEGRATION_FAILURE, OTHER_REAL_WORK). You supply both sides: a capability snapshot you already hold and your workflow requirements. Nothing is fetched and no endpoint is probed, so the answer is reproducible from what you sent and is only ever as good as that snapshot. You get back a verdict with per-check results, coverage, and the limits of the check itself. That is evidence, not an instruction: the caller owns CONTINUE, UPDATE_INTEGRATION, and HOLD, and no verdict maps to any of them. Optional previous (an earlier snapshot and its finished report) adds a revision_receipt comparing that conclusion with this revision. Budget before calling: a Preview grant allows three checks, while POST /v0/snapshot-lint validates argument and requirements shape with no credential and no quota, so start there when unsure. This tool never writes usage-events (usage_event_created is always false) and never discloses the internal Preview bearer; attest your own decision afterwards on a finished owned check.