mcpbeat

OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite MCP Server

sh.stipple/openwarrant
answering

OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite is answering right now. Last checked 8 min ago. It exposes 12 tools.

Document forensics: tamper/AI checks, extract, identity, PII, adverse media. No API key needed.

The linked repository no longer exists on GitHub — it was deleted or made private.

Uptime history 45 hours of history
45 hours agonow
100.0%
Uptime 24h
91 of 91 checks
12
Tools
read from the server
1215 ms
Response time
average over 24h
open, no key
Access
streamable-http

Connect this server

Endpoint below is the one we actually reach during checks — not the one copied from a README. Last verified 8 min ago.

run in your terminal
claude mcp add openwarrant --transport http https://www.stipple.sh/mcp
~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "openwarrant": {
      "url": "https://www.stipple.sh/mcp"
    }
  }
}
~/.codex/config.toml
[mcp_servers.openwarrant]
url = "https://www.stipple.sh/mcp"
.cursor/mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "openwarrant": {
      "url": "https://www.stipple.sh/mcp"
    }
  }
}
.vscode/mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "openwarrant": {
      "url": "https://www.stipple.sh/mcp"
    }
  }
}

Available tools 12

Read directly from the server with tools/list, grouped by what they act on. If a tool disappears, we record the date.

verify
verify_document
Forensically inspect a document (PDF or image) for authenticity: tampering signs, AI-generation indicators, arithmetic reconciliation (financial docs), and provenance. USE THIS WHEN someone shares a payslip, bank statement, invoice, receipt, ID, certificate, or contract and asks: is this genuine / real / authentic? has it been edited, doctored, or photoshopped? can I trust this file? (For "did an AI *write* this prose" use detect_ai_text on /mcp-aitext; for "are this report's citations real" use verify_references on /mcp-verify.) Provide the document ONE way: `url` (a public http(s) link — fetched server-side, the cheapest call: no need to download or encode anything) OR `bytes_b64` (inline base64, plus `filename` so PDF-vs-image routing is right). Returns the headline result — `risk_band` (low/medium/high/insufficient/error), `inspection_quality` (coverage, orthogonal to risk), `recommended_action`, a `summary`, the RISK-axis `risk_findings`, and a shareable `permalink`. This is a SIGNAL, not a fraud verdict — a human or agent adjudicates. Use `get_warrant(warrant_id)` for the full evidence bundle. Identical bytes are cached by content hash — `check_document` first skips a redundant, paid inspection.
verify_identity
Run an Australian identity check over a SET of identity documents. A vision model reads each document (which ID it is, which fields it shows — name/photo/address/signature — and its issue date); a deterministic engine then tallies them against a scheme and reports whether identity is established, and exactly what's still missing if not. USE THIS WHEN someone needs to verify a person's identity from their documents — KYC / onboarding / "do these documents satisfy the 100-point check?" Pass ALL the person's documents together (a passport alone is 70 points; the check needs >= 100). `documents` is a list, each item ONE of: {"url": "https://..."} (public link, fetched server-side) or {"bytes_b64": "...", "filename": "passport.pdf"} (inline). Up to 10. `scheme`: "afp_100_point" (points, default) or "austrac_safe_harbour" (category combinations). Returns `{established, points/target or satisfied_path, documents[] (per-document: type, fields shown, whether it counted and why-not), reason, accepts, ...}`. This is identity COVERAGE, not a forgery judgment — run verify_document for authenticity. Documents are never stored.
verify_references
Fact-check a document's REFERENCES and CLAIMS — built for AI-generated reports whose citations must be checked before they're trusted. USE THIS WHEN someone shares a report, article, whitepaper, or deep-research export (or a link to one) and asks: is this accurate / legit? are these citations real? fact-check this. did the AI make this up? Also use it proactively before relying on any AI-written document. Provide the document ONE way: `url` (a public http(s) link to a PDF or web page — fetched server-side, the cheapest call: no need to download or encode anything), `text` (pasted markdown/plain prose), OR `bytes_b64` (a base64 PDF; URLs are read from the PDF's link annotations, so they're exact). Default (fast): provenance (is it a ChatGPT deep-research export?), citation resolution (live / archived / dead, papers matched against arXiv/Crossref to catch 'real ID, wrong paper'), and internal MATH (recompute the doc's own arithmetic). Set `deep=true` to also fetch each cited source and judge whether it SUPPORTS or CONTRADICTS the claim (slower, ~a minute). Returns a trust summary, per-item tables, and a shareable `permalink` to the public fact-check record. HONEST BOUNDARY: this reports verification COVERAGE, not truth — 'supported' means evidence-backed (not necessarily true) and 'unsupported' means no evidence found (not necessarily false). It tells a reviewer WHERE to look; it does not bless the document, and it never affects the fraud risk band.
classify
classify_document
Classify a FINANCIAL document's type and issuing country. Specialised in financial-services documents: payslip, tax_invoice, bank_statement, salary_certificate, payg_summary, receipt. USE THIS WHEN someone shares a document (or a link to one) and asks: what kind of document is this? is this a payslip / invoice / bank statement? route this document. Also use it as the FIRST step before verify_document, so the right checks run. Provide the document ONE way: `url` (a public http(s) link to a PDF or image — fetched server-side, the cheapest call) OR `bytes_b64` (inline base64, plus `filename` for PDF-vs-image routing). Returns `{document_type, country_code, confidence, is_financial_document, evidence, ...}`. HONEST SCOPE: type classification only — NOT an authenticity or fraud judgment (use verify_document for that). Below the confidence threshold it abstains with 'unknown' rather than guessing; non-financial documents classify as 'other'. The document is never stored.
detect
detect_ai_text
Estimate the PROBABILITY that a document's text was AI-GENERATED (LLM-written prose). USE THIS WHEN someone shares prose — an essay, cover letter, article, review, application, or report (or a link to one) — and asks: did an AI / ChatGPT write this? is this human-written? detect AI text. Provide the document ONE way: `text` (pasted markdown/plain prose), `url` (a public http(s) link to a page or PDF — fetched server-side, the cheapest call), OR `bytes_b64` (a base64 PDF/file, plus `filename` for routing). Returns `{probability, lean, tells, reasoning, applicable}`. HONEST SCOPE: the probability is the model's CONFIDENCE, not a calibrated truth — it can false-flag templated/coached or non-native-English writing. It works on PROSE only: for a form/table/numeric document (payslip, statement) it returns `applicable: false` and abstains, because AI-text detection false-positives badly there — use `verify_document` (the authenticity engine) for those, and `verify_references` to check a doc's citations/claims.
document
check_document
Cheap cache-check: has this exact document already been inspected? Hash the file yourself (sha256, lowercase hex) and call this before verify_document to skip a redundant (paid) inspection. Returns {cached, warrant_id, permalink}.
extract
extract_fields
Extract structured FIELDS from a document (PDF or image) with a vision model. USE THIS WHEN you need specific values OUT of a document — a payslip's gross/net, an invoice's total/ABN, a form's checkboxes, a table's cells — rather than a yes/no about the document. (For "is this genuine?" use verify_document; for "what kind of document is this?" classify_document.) Say WHAT to pull, four ways: - `fields`: an ad-hoc list — names like ["gross_pay","abn"], or objects {"name":..., "type":"text|amount|date|boolean", "description":...}. THE general case: ask for exactly the fields your task needs. Use type "boolean" for a checkbox/tickbox. - `template`: a named preset — "payslip", "tax_invoice", "bank_statement", "receipt". - NEITHER: AUTO — the document is classified and that type's fields are used. - auto on an unrecognised type: schema-free — every labelled field is returned. Provide the document ONE way: `url` (a public http(s) link — fetched server-side, the cheapest call) OR `bytes_b64` (inline base64, plus `filename` for PDF-vs-image routing). `country` is an optional hint; `max_pages` caps how many pages are read (default a few; hard ceiling 10). Returns `{mode, document_type, fields{name:{value,confidence,page}}, not_found, pages_read, page_limit}`. EXTRACTION, not verification — values are what the document SHOWS, not proof it is genuine. A field that isn't clearly present comes back in `not_found` (it abstains rather than guessing). The document is never stored.
pack
check_pack
Check whether a SET of documents satisfies a checklist — completeness, cheaply. USE THIS WHEN you have an application / onboarding pack and need "do we have the required documents, and what's still missing?" Each document is CLASSIFIED (one cheap page-1 read — never full field extraction or multi-page), then matched against the checklist's required slots. (For "is a document genuine?" use verify_document; to identify ONE document use classify_document; for the identity gate use verify_identity.) Define the checklist ONE of two ways: - `scheme`: a named preset — "income_proof", "lending_prequal", "rental_application". - `requirements`: an ad-hoc checklist — a list of document-type names like ["payslip","bank_statement"], or objects {"key":..., "accepts":[types], "optional":bool}. `documents` is a list (up to 12), each ONE of: {"url": "https://..."} (public link, fetched server-side) or {"bytes_b64": "...", "filename": "statement.pdf"} (inline). Returns `{complete, slots[] (key, satisfied, matched), missing[], documents[] (filename, classified_type), unmatched_documents[]}`. COVERAGE, not approval — that the right document TYPES are present, NOT that any is genuine (run verify_document) or that an application is approved. Documents are never stored.
redact
redact_pii
Detect and MASK personally identifiable information in a document (PDF or image). USE THIS WHEN you need to know what PII a document contains, or to get a redacted copy before forwarding / logging / passing it to another model. Two layers: a deterministic regex+checksum pass for structured identifiers (emails, payment cards, SSN, PAN, ABN) and a vision model for the unstructured PII — names, addresses, dates of birth, phone numbers, and photo/signature presence. Provide the document ONE way: `url` (a public http(s) link, fetched server-side) or `bytes_b64` (inline base64, plus `filename`). `max_pages` caps how many pages are read (default a few; ceiling 10). Returns `{pii_found, by_type, items[] (type, masked preview, method), redacted_text, has_photo, has_signature}`. Values are MASKED in the response — the raw PII is never returned. DETECTION coverage, not a guarantee: it may miss PII or over-flag, so review before relying on it for compliance. The document is never stored.
screen
screen_adverse_media
Screen a person or organisation for ADVERSE MEDIA and SANCTIONS/PEP exposure (KYC/AML). USE THIS WHEN onboarding or due-diligence asks: does this subject appear in negative news (fraud, money laundering, bribery, sanctions, trafficking, enforcement action), or on a sanctions / politically-exposed-person list? Pairs naturally after verify_identity. Identify the subject ONE of two ways: pass `name` (plus any of `dob` as YYYY-MM-DD, `country`, `aliases`, `employer`, `role` — these sharpen matching and cut same-name false positives), OR pass an identity document via `url`/`bytes_b64` (+`filename`) and the subject is read from it. Returns `{subject, sanctions{...}, adverse_media{...}, risk_flag, headline, limitations}`: sanctions candidates are corroboration-gated (a name-only hit is `possible`, NEVER confirmed — one common name matches several different people); media hits are entity-disambiguated and classified, with same-name articles surfaced under `excluded`. This is screening COVERAGE, not a determination — a hit means "review this", not "guilty"; "nothing found" is not a clean record. Stateless — nothing is stored.
submit
submit_feedback
Record thumbs up/down on a warrant's rating (the engine's precision-flywheel label source). verdict must be 'up' or 'down'; note is optional free text. USE THIS WHEN the ground truth became known after a verify_document call — e.g. the document was later confirmed genuine or fraudulent — so the engine learns from the outcome. Tell it what happened; it sharpens future inspections for everyone.
warrant
get_warrant
Retrieve a stored warrant by id (e.g. 'warrant_<hex>') — the full bundle as JSON, or a human-readable Markdown report when as_markdown=True. USE THIS WHEN you have a warrant_id from an earlier verify_document / check_document call and need the FULL evidence — every signal that fired, per-page findings, provenance — rather than the summary the original call returned. Use as_markdown=True to get a report you can show a human verbatim.

Endpoints

URLTransportStateLatencyChecked
https://www.stipple.sh/mcp streamable-http answering 761 ms 8 min ago

OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite — questions

Answers built from our own checks of this server.

What can OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite do?
It exposes 12 tools, read directly from the server on our last check. Among them: check_document, check_pack, classify_document, detect_ai_text, extract_fields, get_warrant and 6 more. The full list with descriptions is on this page — we take it from the server itself via tools/list, not from a README. How MCP servers expose tools in the first place →
Is OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite working right now?
We send a real MCP handshake every 15 minutes. Over the last 24 hours 91 of 91 checks got a reply (100.0%), average response time 1215 ms. The bar chart above shows every period we have measured.
Is OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite still maintained?
The linked repository no longer exists on GitHub — it was deleted or made private. We show this because it changes what you can expect: an unmaintained server may keep answering for months and then stop without warning.
How do I connect OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite?
Copy the ready config from this page — we generate it for Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Codex, Cursor and VS Code, each with the file path that client actually reads. It is a remote server, so there is nothing to install — the client connects to the address.
Does OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite need an API key?
No. OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite completed a full MCP handshake with us as an anonymous client and listed its tools without asking for anything. All 12 of them are readable on this page. This is what we observed, not what the docs claim.
How fast is OpenWarrant — Document Verification Suite?
It answers our handshake in 1215 ms on average, which is faster than 3% of all working MCP servers we measure. That is on the slow side — worth knowing if the tool sits inside an interactive loop. The comparison comes from our own checks across the whole registry, every 15 minutes.