Exactlane Preflight MCP
Exactlane Preflight is a static MCP capability compatibility checker. It allows an agent to verify whether a specific MCP capability revision fits its bounded workflow requirements before reliance. The server performs static analysis of caller-provided snapshots against stated requirements, producing compatibility evidence without live endpoint probing. It supports revision-aware checks and returns structured reports on fit, helping callers make informed operational decisions.
Endpoint and access
No sign-in to connect and list tools. Individual tools may still need a vendor account, credentials, or permissions; check the documented prerequisites.
https://exactlane.dev/mcpWhat its tools do
1 tool, grouped by the hints the server advertises. Hints are self-declared, not verified behavior.
Can change data (1)
Checks and signals
Each line is separate evidence, not a trust score.
- Passed Endpoint answered the live check ·
- Passed Official MCP Registry namespace is tied to exactlane.dev ·
- Passed Endpoint is on the registry namespace domain ·
- Availability 1 of 1 checks passed in 30 days
What you can do with it
- Verify MCP capability revision compatibility with agent workflow
- Check static fit of MCP snapshots against workflow requirements
- Obtain revision-aware compatibility evidence before reliance
Source and maintenance
- Maintenance checked
Protocol and capabilities
- Server
- exactlane-preflight 0.1.0
- MCP protocol negotiated in check
- 2025-11-25
- Tools
- 1 advertised
- Resources
- Not advertised
- Resource templates
- Not advertised
- Prompts
- Not advertised
{
"tools": {
"listChanged": false
}
}Server-provided instructions
Untrusted server output shown for inspection. It is not Koskamo guidance and is excluded from knowledge search.
Tools
1 advertised
check_mcp_capability — Check MCP capability
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.
{
"type": "object",
"$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
"required": [
"capability_key",
"snapshot",
"requirements"
],
"properties": {
"previous": {
"type": "object",
"required": [
"snapshot",
"report"
],
"properties": {
"report": {
"type": "object",
"description": "The finished report from the earlier call (structuredContent.report), at most 16 KiB"
},
"snapshot": {
"type": "object",
"description": "The snapshot that previous.report evaluated"
},
"revision_receipt": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Optional revision_receipt from an earlier revision-aware call on previous.report"
}
},
"description": "Optional. Makes this a revision-aware check (POST /v0/revision-checks semantics). Send the snapshot and finished report from an earlier check of the same capability_key with identical requirements. Exactlane re-evaluates them instead of trusting the report and never looks up earlier calls. Omit for the ordinary check.",
"additionalProperties": false
},
"snapshot": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Caller-provided MCP capability snapshot. No live endpoint is accepted."
},
"requirements": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Caller workflow requirements using a supported mcp-consumer-fit schema"
},
"capability_key": {
"type": "string",
"maxLength": 128,
"minLength": 1,
"description": "Opaque caller capability key; same contract as POST /v0/capabilities"
},
"revision_label": {
"type": "string",
"maxLength": 128,
"minLength": 1,
"description": "Optional revision label; defaults to mcp-adapter"
},
"profile_version": {
"enum": [
"0.1",
"0.2",
"0.3"
],
"type": "string",
"description": "Optional mcp-consumer-fit version; inferred from requirements when omitted"
}
},
"additionalProperties": false
}{
"type": "object",
"$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
"required": [
"report",
"caller_owns_operational_decision",
"usage_event_created"
],
"properties": {
"report": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Finished Exactlane check report, substantially unchanged"
},
"decision_note": {
"type": "string"
},
"revision_receipt": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Present only when previous was supplied: exactlane.revision-receipt/0.1. The global previous-to-current comparison is authoritative; isolated change evaluations report DIRECT_EFFECT_OBSERVED, NO_ISOLATED_EFFECT_OBSERVED or NOT_EVALUATED and cannot rule out interaction effects."
},
"usage_event_created": {
"type": "boolean",
"const": false,
"description": "Always false. check_mcp_capability does not POST /v0/usage-events and does not disclose the internal Preview bearer. To attest a client-owned CONTINUE, UPDATE_INTEGRATION, or HOLD decision, use REST POST /v0/usage-events after a finished owned check; report_consumed is required."
},
"caller_owns_operational_decision": {
"type": "boolean",
"const": true
}
},
"additionalProperties": false
}{
"readOnlyHint": false,
"openWorldHint": false,
"idempotentHint": false,
"destructiveHint": false
}Prompts
Not advertised
Resources
Not advertised
30-day availability
Aggregated from read-only remote checks; this is not a tool-execution or security guarantee.
- Successful checks
- 1 of 1 (100%)
- Average latency
- 1255 ms
- 95th percentile latency
- 1255 ms
Maintenance history
Public check and source-refresh events. Editorial and ownership records remain private.
- · probe · passed · 1255 ms · metadata changed · 1 tool(s)
Connect from your client
Each snippet registers the same endpoint; pick the client you use.
Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http exactlane-preflight-mcp https://exactlane.dev/mcpCodex
codex mcp add exactlane-preflight-mcp --url https://exactlane.dev/mcpCursor
{
"mcpServers": {
"exactlane-preflight-mcp": {
"url": "https://exactlane.dev/mcp"
}
}
}Cline
{
"mcpServers": {
"exactlane-preflight-mcp": {
"type": "streamableHttp",
"url": "https://exactlane.dev/mcp",
"disabled": false
}
}
}VS Code
{
"servers": {
"exactlane-preflight-mcp": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://exactlane.dev/mcp"
}
}
}Gemini CLI
gemini mcp add --transport http exactlane-preflight-mcp https://exactlane.dev/mcpClaude Desktop
https://exactlane.dev/mcpWindsurf
{
"mcpServers": {
"exactlane-preflight-mcp": {
"serverUrl": "https://exactlane.dev/mcp"
}
}
}Let your agent find its tools
Find servers like Exactlane Preflight MCP from your agent. Add Koskamo once to search the index for endpoints, access requirements, and client setup. Public discovery needs no key.
Other developer tools servers
Do you run Exactlane Preflight MCP?
Prove ownership with a DNS record, a well-known file, or your Official MCP Registry entry, and your edits publish immediately. Proofs are re-checked weekly; admins can still hide or remove a listing.