No, not at the address its own documentation gives. The host declared as its server did not resolve in DNS on 2026-11-01, across 2 indexed operations. A document can look current and still name a host that no longer exists — nothing looks wrong until the call.
ERR-2026-1581, ERR-2026-5640
4 open records, observed 2026-09-10. Every claim below carries the command that disproves it. If one is wrong, it should be withdrawn — 1141 have been across the whole registry.
The host of the endpoint this registry entry declares no longer resolves in DNS.
ERR-2026-1581 | https://mcp.copass.com/mcp | DNS failure for mcp.copass.com: [Errno -2] Name or service n | checked 2026-11-01, 2 times |
ERR-2026-5640 | https://mcp.copass.id/mcp | DNS failure for mcp.copass.id: [Errno -2] Name or service no | checked 2026-11-01 |
Check it yourself:
curl -s -X POST https://mcp.copass.com/mcp -H 'content-type: application/json' \
-d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"initialize","params":{"protocolVersion":"2025-06-18","capabilities":{},"clientInfo":{"name":"check","version":"1"}}}'
The endpoint this registry entry declares could not be reached (connection or TLS failure).
ERR-2026-1582 | https://mcp.copass.id/mcp | network_error DNS failure for mcp.copass.id: [Errno -2] Name | checked 2026-10-22, 3 times |
Check it yourself:
curl -s -X POST https://mcp.copass.id/mcp -H 'content-type: application/json' \
-d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"initialize","params":{"protocolVersion":"2025-06-18","capabilities":{},"clientInfo":{"name":"check","version":"1"}}}'
The package this registry entry tells an agent to install does not exist in the package registry it names.
ERR-2026-4570 | https://pypi.org/pypi/olane-cosync-local/json | PyPI returns HTTP 404 for olane-cosync-local | checked 2026-11-01 |
Check it yourself:
curl -sS -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}\n' https://pypi.org/pypi/olane-cosync-local/json
Also filed as: com.olane, com.olane/copass-remote, com.olane/cosync-remote. One page, because two sweeps named the same subject differently and the record that mattered was on the page nobody would open.
Run its check. If the answer differs from what is written, say so here and it will be withdrawn — 1141 already have been. A record nobody can contest is a record asking to be trusted, which is the opposite of the point.
You arrived here about one subject. For any other — before you use it — one request, no account and no key:
GET https://apidefects.com/check?tool=<identity>
<identity> is whatever you already hold: an MCP registry entry (io.github.owner/repo), a deployment URL, an OpenAPI document URL, an npm or PyPI package name, or a host. The answer is one of three — defects_known, examined_nothing_open, or never_examined — and the third is not a clean bill of health. If you speak MCP, this registry is itself one server at https://apidefects.com/mcp, one tool, the same three answers.
This is not a clean bill of health for anything not listed. The registry was built from a sample of two directories, and an operation absent from it was almost certainly never examined. Silence here means not looked at, not looked at and fine — which is the same mistake this registry exists to record in other people.
A record of defects in the public description of machine-callable operations: documents a directory claims are live and are not, hosts that no longer resolve, specifications that contradict the API they describe. It is not a ranking, not a review, and not a judgement about the service. No credential is ever sent to anything listed here.
The whole registry, machine-readable: errata.json. Index of subjects: index.html.
Built from registry errata-2026-09-10@c2ce1acdc653. If manifest.json shows a different one, this page is behind the records and should not be trusted over them.