OFACScreen Sanctions Screening

Server Details

Screen names against OFAC SDN and 7 more global sanctions lists. Free, no account required.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.

Status: Healthy
Last Tested: 2026-09-06 08:36
Transport: Streamable HTTP
URL

Available Tools

1 tool

screen_entitySanctions screening (OFAC SDN + 7 more lists)A

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Screen a person or company name against 8 sanctions lists: OFAC SDN, OFAC Non-SDN (Consolidated), BIS Denied Persons List, UN Security Council Consolidated List, EU Financial Sanctions File, UK OFSI Consolidated List, Canada SEMA, and Swiss SECO. Fuzzy name matching, so transliterations and spelling variants still surface. Returns the number of potential matches and the ten highest scoring, each with its score, list, program, aliases and addresses. Free, no account, 25 screenings a day per caller. A score is name similarity and not a finding that a match is the same person. The screening itself is not recorded and produces no document: report_url opens the same search on ofacscreen.com, where a timestamped PDF record of it can be bought. The price is in report_price. Calling this tool is free.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Full name of the person or entity to screen, e.g. "Vladimir Petrov" or "Acme Trading LLC". Up to 300 characters.

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`report_url`	Yes
`match_found`	Yes
`screened_at`	No
`report_price`	Yes
`results_count`	Yes
`results_shown`	No
`lists_screened`	No
`is_audit_record`	No
`lists_refreshed`	No
`results_truncated`	No
`results_count_is_capped`	No

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds meaningful behavioral depth: it states the screening is not recorded and produces no document, explains that report_url only opens the same search on ofacscreen.com where a PDF can be purchased, and clarifies the cost (free call, paid report). It also discloses the 25-per-day limit and that the score is not a legal finding. This goes beyond the annotations and gives the agent a complete understanding of side effects and limitations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than many but every sentence adds value: it lists the eight lists, mentions fuzzy matching, describes the return format, gives the rate limit, explains the score's meaning, and clarifies the paid PDF option. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then provides necessary caveats. There is no fluff or repetition; each clause serves a purpose. A slightly tighter phrasing could reduce length, but it remains highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter), the existing annotations, and the presence of an output schema (which presumably details the returned fields), the description covers all critical contextual aspects: the exact lists, the fuzzy-matching behavior, the free tier and rate limit, the non-recorded nature, the score interpretation, and the report purchase flow. It leaves no ambiguity about what happens when the tool is called, making it fully self-sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already describes the 'name' parameter thoroughly: 'Full name of the person or entity to screen, e.g. "Vladimir Petrov" or "Acme Trading LLC". Up to 300 characters.' The description adds that fuzzy matching is used, which influences how the parameter is interpreted, but this is more about tool behavior than the parameter itself. Since schema coverage is 100% and the description contributes little additional semantic detail beyond the example, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description immediately states the tool's core action: 'Screen a person or company name against 8 sanctions lists.' It then enumerates the exact lists (OFAC SDN, OFAC Non-SDN, etc.), making it unmistakable what resource is being queried. It also describes fuzzy matching and the output (number of potential matches and top ten scoring hits), fully distinguishing it from any hypothetical alternative. Even without sibling tools, the purpose is precise and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear practical usage context: it is free, requires no account, has a rate limit (25 per day), and explicitly warns that the score represents name similarity, not a definitive match. It also explains how to obtain a timestamped PDF via report_url. While it doesn't mention alternative tools or when-not-to-use, the lack of sibling tools makes this less critical. The guidance is actionable and prevents misinterpretation of results.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

1 tool updateAug 19, 2026

Changedscreen_entity13 fields changed

removedInput schema / properties / entity_type

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Optional filter: restrict matches to individuals or to entities/organizations. Omit to search both.",
-  "enum": [
-    "individual",
-    "entity"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"Full name of the person or entity to screen, e.g. \"Vladimir Petrov\" or \"Acme Trading LLC\"."New value: +"Full name of the person or entity to screen, e.g. \"Vladimir Petrov\" or \"Acme Trading LLC\". Up to 300 characters."

addedInput schema / properties / name / maxLength
```
Added value: +300
```
addedOutput schema / properties / is_audit_record
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / lists_refreshed

Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / lists_screened
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / addresses_total
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / aliases_total
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```
changedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / matched_alias / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
addedOutput schema / properties / results_count_is_capped
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / results_shown
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / results_truncated
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / screened_at
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

1 tool updateAug 19, 2026
- First observedscreen_entity

Frequently Asked Questions

Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.

Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
- GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such as io.github.acme/server also needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.
- HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
- DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.

The HTTP ownership file has this structure:

{
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
  "claim": "glama_claim_..."
}

Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.

If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.

For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Related MCP Connectors

Sanctions Screening A
io.github.pipeworx-io
Screen names against the US Consolidated Screening List: OFAC SDN, BIS Entity List +10 more lists
Legal & Compliance Government Data
342
OFAC SDN Screening A
com.bonissystems
Screen a name against the U.S. Treasury OFAC SDN list. Information, not a compliance determination.
Legal & Compliance Security Government Data
22
Vett Compliance MCP Server
io.github.Gorp405
Sanctions, PEP, watchlist, recall, business, and contract screening. Free tier, no auth required.
Legal & Compliance Finance
1
Sanctions Screening A
dev.hatchloop
Sanctions screening against OFAC SDN, the EU Consolidated list and the UK Sanctions List.
Legal & Compliance Government Data
811

Related MCP Servers

mcp-sanctions-screening
Legal & Compliance Government Data Search
pipeworx-io
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Screens names against the US Consolidated Screening List including OFAC SDN and BIS Entity List, keyless.
Updated 11 days ago (2026-08-26 17:37 UTC)
10
MIT
Sanctions Screening MCP Server
Finance Legal & Compliance
apifymcpfactory-droid
F
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
Screens names and companies against OFAC, EU, UK, and UN sanctions lists with fuzzy-match scores, supporting bulk lookups for AML/KYC checks. Data is sourced directly from official government lists and cached for fast repeat checks.
Updated a month ago (2026-07-29 11:33 UTC)
-
@cyanheads/sanctions-screeningofficial
Legal & Compliance Government Data Open Data
cyanheads
A
license
Not graded
quality
A
maintenance
Screen names against consolidated OFAC, EU, UK, and UN sanctions lists and resolve legal entities via GLEIF, with offline fuzzy matching.
Updated 12 days ago (2026-08-25 08:27 UTC)
284
1
Apache 2.0
FinCEN (EUA)
Finance Legal & Compliance Government Data
mcp-dir
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Checks names against US FinCEN financial crime lists for compliance and AML due diligence, with a single read-only tool.
Updated 22 days ago (2026-08-15 20:35 UTC)
MIT

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

There is only one tool, so there is no possibility of overlapping or confusing tool purposes within the server. screen_entity is clearly the sole operation for sanctions screening.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name, screen_entity, follows a clear verb_noun pattern and is immediately understandable. With only one tool, there are no competing conventions or inconsistent naming styles to confuse an agent.

Tool Count3/5

One tool is functional but feels thin for a sanctions screening domain that could reasonably offer batch screening or list-specific lookups. The count is at the very low end of the rubric, though the single tool is not trivial.

Completeness4/5

The core screening workflow is well covered: it searches multiple sanctions lists, handles fuzzy name matching, and returns match details. Minor gaps exist, such as no batch screening tool and no built-in report or PDF generation, but agents can work around these by calling the tool repeatedly.

Resources

Need Help?

Server Details

Available Tools

Output Schema

TDQS

Tool Schema Changelog

Frequently Asked Questions

Discussions

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

mcp-sanctions-screening

Sanctions Screening MCP Server

@cyanheads/sanctions-screeningofficial

FinCEN (EUA)

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources