Request access

Tell us what you're building and name one token. We will run it through the live verifier and reply with a sample signed receipt — verdict, findings, coverage gaps, signature — plus an API key if it is a fit.

One token you want Raven to check ? Paste whatever you have: the token's mint address, its name or ticker, or just a DexScreener/Birdeye link. We'll find it and run the check. Name ? What we should call you in the reply. First name or a handle is fine. Email ? Where we send your signed verdict. Never shared, never published — and not included if you submit via GitHub. Project ? One line about what you're building or doing — a trading bot, an AI agent, a wallet, a community you moderate. "Just checking a token before I buy" is a perfectly good answer. Which best describes you? ? Helps us reply at the right level — beginner answers get plain language, developer answers get curl and config. Use case ? Where the verdict fits in your flow. Examples: "check a token before I ape", "my agent verifies every token before trading", "screen launches for my group". What decision would Raven support? ? The yes/no moment where the verdict matters. This is the single most useful thing you can tell us. Missing evidence you care about most ? Raven lists what it has NOT checked in every verdict. Which gap would you most want closed?

liquidity holders deployer history Token-2022

Other evidence (optional) Do you need receipt storage or agent memory? ? Raven works without any storage — receipts are yours to keep wherever you like. This just tells us whether to prioritize storage guidance and adapters. See /receipt-storage.html. Preferred access path ? How you'd rather call Raven. Hosted = we run it, you get signed verdicts by key. ACP = your agent pays 0.1 USDC per job, no key. MCP = run it locally for free. "Unsure" is fine — we'll recommend one. Expected volume ? A rough guess at how many token checks you'd run per day once you have a key. It only helps us size your rate limit — guessing low or high is fine. I want holder‑beta access ? An advanced extra check: how concentrated the token's holders are — with known pool and venue wallets factored out, so a liquidity pool doesn't get mistaken for one giant whale.

GitHub submissions are public — use email if sharing contact details. Either way: we'll run your token and reply with a signed verdict.

Raven Scout — how to read what you'll get back

Your verdict will be one of: risk (a rug-capable control exists), warning (something needs eyes, or important surfaces are unverified), pass with info (clean on checked surfaces, notes attached), or unknowable (the chain couldn't be read — we don't guess).

When something cannot be checked, the verdict says why: the account could not be fetched, a layout could not be decoded, an extension is unrecognized, or the signer is unavailable — each becomes an explicit finding, gap, or unknowable, never a silent pass.

Raven never says "safe". If coverage gaps remain, the honest answer is: not enough evidence for a full pass — and the verdict will list exactly which gaps those are.

Raw request:

curl -X POST https://raven-hosted-verifier.onrender.com/verify \
  -H "x-api-key: $KEY" -H "content-type: application/json" \
  -d '{"mintAddress":"<mint>","tokenProgramAddress":"<program>"}'

MCP: npx -y raven-verify-mcp → tool raven_verify_token (config). Contract: openapi.json.

Attestation: verify signature (ed25519, domain raven-official-attestation) over officialAttestationHash against /pubkey key rvk_c2997e90215279c2; recompute replayHash from response fields (recipe).

coverageGaps is normative: anything listed there was NOT evaluated. A pass-grade verdict with gaps is "no risk findings on checked surfaces", never "safe".

Request access

Raven Scout — how to read what you'll get back Advanced mode

Raven Scout — how to read what you'll get back