Exactlane Preflight

dev.exactlane/preflightVersion 0.1.0

Caller-specific static MCP capability fit evidence. No live probing; caller owns the decision.

Status

Responds864 msNov 14, 2026, 14:26 UTCAnswered our handshake without sign-in.

Registry data may be out of date

We could not refresh it, so this page shows the last copy.

Last checked: Nov 14, 2026, 14:26 UTC
Latency: 864 ms
Remotes responding: 1 of 1
Sign-in: No sign-in
Hosting: Hosted outside the EU (detected)
Registry data as of: Nov 14, 2026, 21:12 UTC

Data from the official MCP Registry, checked by run.zero. How we check

Connect

Streamable HTTP

https://exactlane.dev/mcpResponds864 msNov 14, 2026, 14:26 UTC

No sign-in

Claude Code

claude mcp add --transport http preflight https://exactlane.dev/mcp

Claude Desktop and claude.ai

1
2
3

Settings > Connectors > Add custom connector
Name: preflight
Remote MCP server URL: https://exactlane.dev/mcp

Cursor

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "preflight": {
      "url": "https://exactlane.dev/mcp"
    }
  }
}

VS Code

code --add-mcp '{"name":"preflight","type":"http","url":"https://exactlane.dev/mcp"}'

Built your own server? run.zero hosts MCP servers on European infrastructure.

Host your own MCP server on run.zero

Tools

1 tools

Tools of Exactlane Preflight
	Description		Read-only	Idempotent	Open world
`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.	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.	No	No	No	No

Details

Registry status: Active
Published: Sep 11, 2026
Updated: Sep 11, 2026
Website: https://exactlane.dev/⁠ (opens in a new tab)
Repository: https://github.com/cid2230/exactlane-preflight-public⁠ (opens in a new tab)
Categories: Uncategorized
GDPR: Not declared

Are you the operator? Claim this listing