org.openformatdb/openformatdb

2 of 7 tools are described as changing something (creating, editing, deleting, sending or running).

• identify_filereads or searches

  “Candidate formats for a file, ranked: a signature match beats a MIME type, which beats an extension.”

  Publisher declares: read-only yes · destructive no · open-world no

  4 inputs

  • magic_hexstring“First bytes of the file as hex, spaces allowed (64 bytes is usually enough)”
  • extensionstring“File name or extension, e.g.”
  • mimestring“MIME type if known, e.g.”
  • limitinteger
• lookup_formatreads or searches

  “Full record of a format: identifiers, which software reads or writes it (open source first), grammars, specification, family and versions, live claims, and advice on what to do next.”

  Publisher declares: read-only yes · destructive no · open-world no

  4 inputs

  • idstring“OpenFormatDB id, from identify_file or search_formats”
  • puidstring“PRONOM id, e.g.”
  • wikidatastring“Wikidata QID, e.g.”
  • mimestring
• search_formatson 1 other serverreads or searches

  “Ranked formats matching a name, alias, extension, MIME type, PUID or QID, optionally by category or status.”

  Publisher declares: read-only yes · destructive no · open-world no

  4 inputs, 1 required

  • querystringrequired
  • categorystring
  • statusstring“unknown, in-progress, partial, readable (open code reads it), writable (open code writes it)”
  • limitinteger
• find_conversionreads or searches

  “How to convert a file from one format to another with open tools: the cheapest chains (lossless first), each step with its tool, command and what is lost.”

  Publisher declares: read-only yes · destructive no · open-world no

  3 inputs, 1 required

  • fromstringrequired“Source format id, extension or file name”
  • tostring“Target format id, extension or file name”
  • max_stepsinteger“Longest chain (default 3)”
• list_sourceson 92 other serversreads or searches

  “Sources aggregated in OpenFormatDB, with record counts, licences and snapshot dates.”

  Publisher declares: read-only yes · destructive no · open-world no

  Takes no inputs.

• claim_formatcreates or changes datadescribed as changing data

  “Say you are reverse engineering or documenting a format, so nobody duplicates the work: adds a claim (who, contact, scope, up to 90 days) to data/formats/<id>.yaml, creating the record if the format …”

  Publisher declares: read-only no · destructive no · open-world no

  11 inputs, 3 required

  • idstring“Format id if it exists (from identify_file, lookup_format or search_formats).”
  • namestring“Format name, for a format not in OpenFormatDB yet”
  • versionstring
  • categorystring“Required only for a new format”
  • extensionsarray“Extensions of a new format, without the dot”
  • whostringrequired“Who is working on it: your human's name or handle”
  • contactstringrequired“How others reach the claimant: email, GitHub handle, issue URL”
  • scopestringrequired“What you will document, e.g.”
  • daysinteger“Claim duration (default 30, max 90)”
  • agentstring“Agent/tooling used”
  • force_newboolean“Create a new record even though a similar format exists”
• publish_findingson 1 other servercreates or changes datadescribed as changing data

  “Merge what you found into data/formats/<id>.yaml: structure, grammars, tools, conversions, specification, identifiers, verification.”

  Publisher declares: read-only no · destructive no · open-world no

  4 inputs, 2 required

  • idstringrequired“Format id”
  • patchobjectrequired
  • allow_downgradeboolean“Allow lowering the status (explain why in the summary or a verification note)”
  • release_claim_ofstring“Remove the live claims of this claimant now that the work is published”

Each quoted sentence is the first sentence of the publisher’s own description. The kind of tool and the “changes data” mark are our AI model’s reading of that description, not something we tested: two differently worded runs had to agree, otherwise no label is shown, and nobody has checked them by hand. A tool without the “changes data” mark is described as only reading, searching or calculating, or the two runs did not agree. No tool was called. Read the publisher’s full description before relying on it. “Publisher declares” lists the hints the server itself sends with the tool (MCP annotations: read-only, destructive, idempotent, open-world); they are the publisher's claims, not checked by us. Inputs are the parameters in the tool's own input schema: name, declared type, whether it is required, and the first sentence of its description. Read 2026-10-23.

The registry verifies a package once, when it is published, and does not re-check it. A difference below is about the listing, not a judgement of the publisher.