A
licenseNot graded
qualityB
maintenanceFaker AI - MCP server providing AI-powered tools and automation by MEOK AI Labs
25
MIT
Scam Detector MCP
by CSOAI-ORG
The Scam Detector MCP server provides AI-powered tools for detecting scams, phishing, and social engineering in messages, URLs, and sender identities, and allows reporting scams for collective threat intelligence.
quick_check: Paste any message (email, text, DM) and receive an instant scam probability score.analyze_url: Submit a URL to check for phishing indicators and suspicious patterns.detect_social_engineering: Analyze conversation text to identify manipulation tactics based on Cialdini's principles of influence.verify_sender: Check an email address or phone number against known scam vectors to assess its legitimacy.report_scam: Log and analyze a scam report to contribute to collective threat intelligence.
All tools are read-only and stateless. The free tier allows 10 calls/day per tool; Pro/Enterprise tiers offer unlimited usage with a MEOK API key.
mcp-name: io.github.CSOAI-ORG/scam-detector-mcp
Scam Detector MCP
By [MEOK AI Labs](https://meok
By MEOK AI Labs | The only MCP server for scam and fraud detection.
🚀 Quick Start
# Install via pip
pip install scam_detector_mcp
# Or install via Smithery
npx -y @smithery/cli@latest install scam-detector-mcp --client claudeRelated MCP server: Deepfake Detector MCP
✨ Features
MCP protocol compliant
Easy installation
Well-documented API
Production-ready
Active maintenance
📖 Documentation
🛡️ Compliance
This MCP server is built with EU AI Act compliance built-in:
✅ Article 9 — Risk Management System
✅ Article 13 — Transparency & Instructions for Use
✅ Article 15 — Bias Detection & Testing
✅ Article 26 — FRIA Support (where applicable)
✅ Article 50 — AI Content Watermarking (where applicable)
Need help getting compliant? Book a free 15-min diagnostic →
🏢 Enterprise
Need custom development, SLA guarantees, or white-label deployment?
Pro: $99/mo — Full MCP suite + EU AI Act tracking
Enterprise: $499/mo — Custom dev + SLA + Dedicated support
View Pricing → | Contact Sales →
🤝 Part of the MEOK Ecosystem
This server is part of the MEOK AI Labs ecosystem — 300+ MCP servers for sovereign AI governance.
Domain | Purpose |
EU AI Act compliance marketplace | |
AI safety & monitoring | |
Sovereign AI platform | |
Legacy modernization |
📜 License
MIT © CSOAI-ORG
Pairs with MEOK Governance Suite
Build something that touches users? You need compliance. MEOK ships 38 governance MCPs that drop in alongside this tool — EU AI Act, DORA, NIS2, CRA, GDPR, ISO 42001, FDA SaMD, MDR, Basel, MiFID II, MiCA, COPPA, and more.
# One-shot install of the governance pack
npx meok-setup --pack governanceFree tier: 10 calls/day per MCP. Pro tier (£79/mo): unlimited + cryptographically signed compliance attestations your auditor verifies independently.
→ Full catalogue: councilof.ai/catalogue → MEOK AI Labs: meok.ai
💸 Try MEOK in 30 seconds — instant buy ladder
Tier | Price | What you get | Stripe |
Smoke test | £1 | Signed sample MCP-Hardening report + Article 50 PDF | |
Quick Kit | £9 | EU AI Act Article 50 implementation guide (C2PA + EU-Icon) | |
Founder Call | £29 | 30-min 1-on-1 with the founder |
Refundable. UK Stripe — VAT-clean. Builds on the 81-MCP MEOK fleet. Verify any signed report at https://meok.ai/verify.
Available Tools
5 toolsanalyze_urlA
Check a URL for phishing indicators and suspicious patterns.
Args: url: The URL to analyze for phishing indicators. api_key: Optional MEOK API key for pro tier.
Behavior: This tool is read-only and stateless — it produces analysis output without modifying any external systems, databases, or files. Safe to call repeatedly with identical inputs (idempotent). Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited. No authentication required for basic usage.
When to use: Use this tool when you need structured analysis or classification of inputs against established frameworks or standards.
When NOT to use: Not suitable for real-time production decision-making without human review of results. Behavioral Transparency: - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned directly to the caller. - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable. - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset). - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure. Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors. - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure. - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services. All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | ||
| api_key | No |
TDQS
A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description comprehensively covers side effects, authentication, rate limits, error handling, idempotency, and data privacy in a dedicated section. This fully compensates for the lack of annotations.
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 well-structured with clear headings and sections, but it is somewhat verbose and repeats behavioral transparency information in both a list and a block. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and remains readable.
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 no output schema, no annotations, and no schema descriptions, the description is highly complete. It covers behavior, error handling, rate limits, authentication, and privacy, leaving no critical gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool.
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?
Schema coverage is 0% (no descriptions in schema). The description provides brief explanations for each parameter (url, api_key) in the Args section, adding some meaning beyond the schema, but does not elaborate on formats, constraints, or defaults. This partially compensates but could be more detailed.
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 states 'Check a URL for phishing indicators and suspicious patterns,' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like detect_social_engineering or verify_sender by focusing on URL phishing analysis.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly provides 'When to use' (structured analysis against frameworks) and 'When NOT to use' (not for real-time production without human review), offering clear context and exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
detect_social_engineeringA
Detect manipulation tactics (Cialdini's principles) in conversations.
Args: conversation: The conversation text to analyze for social engineering tactics. api_key: Optional MEOK API key for pro tier.
Behavior: This tool is read-only and stateless — it produces analysis output without modifying any external systems, databases, or files. Safe to call repeatedly with identical inputs (idempotent). Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited. No authentication required for basic usage.
When to use: Use this tool when you need structured analysis or classification of inputs against established frameworks or standards.
When NOT to use: Not suitable for real-time production decision-making without human review of results. Behavioral Transparency: - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned directly to the caller. - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable. - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset). - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure. Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors. - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure. - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services. All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| conversation | Yes | ||
| api_key | No |
TDQS
A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Despite no annotations, the description fully covers side effects (read-only, stateless), authentication, rate limits, error handling, idempotency, and data privacy. Provides comprehensive behavioral disclosure.
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?
Well-structured with clear sections, but somewhat lengthy. Every sentence adds value, though could be tighter. Front-loads core purpose.
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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and behavioral aspects thoroughly. Includes rate limits, error handling, and idempotency—complete for informed use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the 'conversation' parameter as text to analyze and 'api_key' as optional for pro tier. Adds meaningful context beyond schema types.
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 clearly states the tool detects manipulation tactics using Cialdini's principles in conversations, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_url and verify_sender which handle different tasks.
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?
Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections provide clear context for structured analysis vs. production decision-making. Lacks direct comparison to siblings, but sibling purposes are distinct enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
quick_checkA
Paste any message (email, text, DM) -> instant scam probability score. No API key required.
Behavior: This tool is read-only and stateless — it produces analysis output without modifying any external systems, databases, or files. Safe to call repeatedly with identical inputs (idempotent). Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited. No authentication required for basic usage.
When to use: Use this tool when you need structured analysis or classification of inputs against established frameworks or standards.
When NOT to use: Not suitable for real-time production decision-making without human review of results. Behavioral Transparency: - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned directly to the caller. - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable. - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset). - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure. Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors. - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure. - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services. All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | Yes |
TDQS
A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Detailed behavioral transparency section covering side effects, authentication, rate limits, error handling, idempotency, and data privacy. Exceeds what annotations would provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Well-structured with clear headings, front-loaded purpose, and efficient use of text. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral details, and parameter semantics. No gaps for a simple analysis tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Single parameter 'message' is clearly described as the input text. Although schema lacks description, the tool description adds meaningful context about the parameter's role.
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?
Clearly states the tool provides a scam probability score for messages (email, text, DM). Differentiated from siblings like analyze_url which handles URLs.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections guide appropriate usage, including caveats about real-time decisions and rate limits.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
report_scamA
Log and analyze a scam report. Contributes to collective threat intelligence.
Args: description: Description of the scam including the message, sender, and what happened. api_key: Optional MEOK API key for pro tier.
Behavior: This tool is read-only and stateless — it produces analysis output without modifying any external systems, databases, or files. Safe to call repeatedly with identical inputs (idempotent). Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited. No authentication required for basic usage.
When to use: Use this tool when you need structured analysis or classification of inputs against established frameworks or standards.
When NOT to use: Not suitable for real-time production decision-making without human review of results. Behavioral Transparency: - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned directly to the caller. - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable. - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset). - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure. Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors. - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure. - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services. All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| description | Yes | ||
| api_key | No |
TDQS
A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It thoroughly discloses side effects (read-only, stateless, idempotent), authentication (none required for basic, optional API key for pro), rate limits (10/day free, unlimited pro), error handling (structured errors), and data privacy (no storage). This exceeds expectations.
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 well-structured with sections (Args, Behavior, When to use, Behavioral Transparency) but contains some redundancy between the Behavior and Behavioral Transparency sections. It is front-loaded with purpose, but could be slightly more concise without losing information.
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 complexity and lack of annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameters, behavioral traits, error handling, and privacy. It adequately compensates for the missing output schema by stating the tool produces analysis output in-memory.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly describes the 'description' parameter as 'Description of the scam including the message, sender, and what happened.' and 'api_key' as 'Optional MEOK API key for pro tier.' This adds meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema.
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 clearly states 'Log and analyze a scam report. Contributes to collective threat intelligence.' This defines a specific verb (log and analyze) and resource (scam report). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'analyze_url' and 'verify_sender' which handle different input types.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description includes explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, providing clear context and exclusions. It advises use for structured analysis and warns against real-time production decisions without human review, which helps the agent decide appropriately.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
verify_senderA
Check sender patterns against known scam vectors.
Args: email_or_phone: The email address or phone number to check. api_key: Optional MEOK API key for pro tier.
Behavior: This tool is read-only and stateless — it produces analysis output without modifying any external systems, databases, or files. Safe to call repeatedly with identical inputs (idempotent). Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited. No authentication required for basic usage.
When to use: Use this tool when you need structured analysis or classification of inputs against established frameworks or standards.
When NOT to use: Not suitable for real-time production decision-making without human review of results. Behavioral Transparency: - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned directly to the caller. - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable. - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset). - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure. Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors. - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure. - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services. All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| email_or_phone | Yes | ||
| api_key | No |
TDQS
A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: read-only, stateless, idempotent, rate limits, authentication, error handling, and data privacy. No contradictions.
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?
Well-structured with sections, front-loaded purpose, and minimal redundancy. Slightly lengthy but all sentences add value.
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?
Despite no output schema and only 2 parameters, the description provides comprehensive context: behavior, limitations, error handling, and privacy, ensuring the agent can use the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning for both parameters: email_or_phone 'The email address or phone number to check' and api_key 'Optional MEOK API key for pro tier,' compensating fully.
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 clearly states 'Check sender patterns against known scam vectors,' specifying the verb (check) and resource (sender patterns) and differentiates it from sibling tools like analyze_url and detect_social_engineering.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections provide clear guidance: use for structured analysis against frameworks, not for real-time production without human review.
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.
5 tool updates
v1.0.4- First observed
analyze_url - First observed
detect_social_engineering - First observed
quick_check - First observed
report_scam - First observed
verify_sender
TDQS
A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Tools target different inputs: URLs, conversations, messages, reports, and sender patterns. Some overlap between quick_check and detect_social_engineering, but descriptions differentiate them adequately.
Naming Consistency4/5
Most tools follow verb_noun convention (analyze_url, detect_social_engineering, report_scam, verify_sender). quick_check deviates as adjective_noun, but still uses underscores and is readable.
Tool Count5/5
5 tools is well-scoped for a scam detection server, covering key analysis and reporting functions without bloat or deficiency.
Completeness4/5
Covers major scam detection areas: URL analysis, social engineering, message scoring, sender verification, and reporting. Missing maybe bulk or historical queries, but covers essential workflows.
Maintenance
ActivityStale
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
Security scanner for MCP servers. Detect vulnerabilities, prompt injection, and tool poisoning.
Crypto market intelligence, token rug-checks, and wallet verification in one MCP server.
MCP server for Flux AI image generation
MCP server for MaxMind minFraud — score transactions for fraud risk from your AI assistant.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceDeepfake Detector - MCP server providing AI-powered tools and automation by MEOK AI Labs20MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAI Self Audit - MCP server providing AI-powered tools and automation by MEOK AI Labs14MIT
License Checker AI MCPofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceLicense Checker AI - MCP server providing AI-powered tools and automation by MEOK AI Labs14MIT
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/CSOAI-ORG/scam-detector-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server