io.github.pipeworx-io/brazil-comex-stat

Settings → Connectors → Add custom connector, then paste:
https://gateway.pipeworx.io/brazil-comex-stat/mcp

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "brazil-comex-stat": {
      "url": "https://gateway.pipeworx.io/brazil-comex-stat/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "servers": {
    "brazil-comex-stat": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://gateway.pipeworx.io/brazil-comex-stat/mcp"
    }
  }
}

code --add-mcp '{"name":"brazil-comex-stat","type":"http","url":"https://gateway.pipeworx.io/brazil-comex-stat/mcp"}'

claude mcp add --transport http brazil-comex-stat https://gateway.pipeworx.io/brazil-comex-stat/mcp

npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector@2.11.0 --server-url https://gateway.pipeworx.io/brazil-comex-stat/mcp --transport http

Built from the server's registry entry with each client's documented format (checked 2026-10-14; the Cursor link and the VS Code command 2026-10-19; the MCP Inspector command 2026-10-21). Values in < > are yours to fill in; this page never contains a key. Where the server needs a setting the entry does not declare, it can still fail to start.

Facts about the publisher. We do not turn them into a trust score.

Source: the registry entry and api.github.com · 2026-10-23; security policy read from GitHub · 2026-10-23.

Publish this server? Run these checks against it yourself before release, from your own machine: a server the command starts, or your own server at its URL after a one-time proof that you control it: npx protocolprobe-selftest.

• app.worldmonitor/mcpWorld Monitorcompare with this one
• io.github.metabase/mcpMetabasecompare with this one
• io.github.t8y2/dbxcompare with this one
• io.github.googleapis/mcp-toolboxMCP Toolbox for Databasescompare with this one
• io.github.googleapis/genai-toolboxMCP Toolbox for Databasescompare with this one
• io.github.open-metadata/openmetadata-mcpOpenMetadatacompare with this one

Active servers whose topic is also “data-and-databases”, most GitHub stars first. The topic and the tool kinds are an AI model's reading of the publishers' descriptions, not checked by hand. Similar is not a recommendation.

Not probed (we call no server's tools)

We connected and read what the server declares, but did not call its tools: ProtocolProbe calls no server's tools for anything it publishes. This is our choice, not a block by the server. No security score is given; a check we did not run is never counted as passed.

Each check ends in exactly one state: exercised, not run (with the reason), or not applicable (with the reason). 5 of the 16 checks that apply to it were exercised. We do not publish security-check outcomes for named servers.

Source: our own test, 2026-10-23, mcp-runtime-engine@0.1.0. Which checks count and why follows our published scoring model.

The steps in order, as the test record holds them.

1. 0 msStarted a read-only session with the server's remote endpoint
2. 114 msConnected after 0 redirects. No credential was sent or needed.
3. Read the inventory: 0 tools, 0 resources, 12 prompts.
4. 3,006 msFinished: 5 checks exercised.

One value per field, each with its source. Fields written by AI models are marked. A field with no value says why.

“Not stated” means the source did not state it; “does not apply” means it does not apply to this kind of server; “our limit” means our own lookup failed. A linked value opens the directory filtered to the same value.