mcpField
C
Codex Gsfa

Codex Gsfa

Remote
pipeworx.ioLegal & Government0Updated 1w ago

About Codex Gsfa

Codex Gsfa is an MCP server for consulting the FAO/WHO General Standard for Food Additives (CXS 192-1995). It helps food and regulatory professionals check additive permissions, levels, conditions, and category coverage using archived snapshots.

Key features

  1. 01Check additive use by food category
  2. 02Resolve additive names and INS numbers
  3. 03List provisions by additive or category
  4. 04Search food category codes
  5. 05Resolve and search provision notes
  6. 06Inspect dataset coverage and dates

Use cases

  1. 01Check whether an additive is allowed in a food
  2. 02Find the maximum permitted use level
  3. 03Review conditions attached to a provision
  4. 04Locate additives permitted in a category

MCP support

Exposes GSFA lookup tools to MCP clients through a hosted Pipeworx endpoint or a local stdio server. The tools distinguish numeric limits from GMP provisions and include the text of qualifying notes.

Configuration

Remote servers need no local install. Pick your client, then copy the config or install in one click.

Endpointhttps://gateway.pipeworx.io/codex-gsfa/mcp
Copy install command
Claude CodeTerminal
Cursor.cursor/mcp.json
VS Code.vscode/mcp.json
Claude Desktopclaude_desktop_config.json
Windsurf~/.codeium/windsurf/mcp_config.json

Run commands in a terminal; paste JSON into the client’s MCP config and restart. Servers that need sign-in will prompt on first connect.

Tools

Details

From the project README

@pipeworx/codex-gsfa

The FAO/WHO Codex General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA, CXS 192-1995) — which food additives may be used in which foods, at what maximum level, under which conditions.

Part of Pipeworx — an MCP gateway connecting AI agents to 1831+ live data sources. This is an independent, unofficial integration — not affiliated with, endorsed by, or published by the upstream provider.

Tools

ToolAnswers
gsfa_check_useIs INS 461 permitted in cooked fish, and at what level? — the question the standard exists to answer
gsfa_search_additiveResolve an INS number, name, or synonym to its GSFA entry
gsfa_additive_provisionsEvery food category one additive is permitted in
gsfa_food_category_additivesEvery additive permitted in one food category
gsfa_search_food_categoriesFind a GSFA category number by name or number prefix
gsfa_notesResolve the numbered notes that condition a provision, or search them by wording
gsfa_coverageWhat this dataset holds and how current it is

Two kinds of permission

GSFA grants use in two structurally different ways, and every provision returned says which one it came from:

  • Table 1 & 2 (provision_table: "table1_2") — a specific maximum use level, either numeric (10,000 mg/kg) or GMP, usually conditioned by numbered notes.
  • Table 3 (provision_table: "table3") — the additive is permitted under good manufacturing practice with no numeric limit.

For methyl cellulose that is 17 Table 1/2 provisions against 61 Table 3 ones. Treating them as one thing either invents limits the standard does not set or hides most of where an additive is actually allowed.

Subcategory inheritance

A GSFA provision applies to the food category named and all of its subcategories — a provision on 01.4 also governs 01.4.4. Lookups walk up the numbering and report inherited_from_parent plus matched_food_category, because "permitted at this level for this exact food" and "permitted because its parent category is" are different answers.

permitted: false means the standard lists no provision. That is not the same as an explicit prohibition, and the response says so rather than implying a ban.

Notes are part of the answer

Provisions are frequently qualified by numbered notes — "for use in ready-to-drink products only", "as sulphur dioxide", "on the fat basis" — and a maximum level is not fully specified without them. 2,590 of 15,377 provisions carry one.

Note text is inlined on every provision (notes: [{id, text}]), not left as a bare id, because an id with no text invites a caller to read the level and stop. gsfa_notes resolves ids directly or searches note wording.

The text is scraped from the note icon's tooltip on each additive page, so it carries the same Codex session as the additive it qualifies. All 468 cited note ids resolve.

Auth

None. The dataset ships inside the pack.

Freshness

Every additive result carries cac_session, cac_year, and snapshot_date. Records come from archived snapshots of GSFA Online, so individual additives can lag the newest Codex session — gsfa_coverage reports which sessions are present and which additive ids could not be retrieved at all (entries whose every archived snapshot is one of FAO's own error pages).

Regenerate with:

node --experimental-strip-types scripts/ingest-gsfa.ts

Data sources

Quick Start

Add to your MCP client (Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, etc.):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "codex-gsfa": {
      "url": "https://gateway.pipeworx.io/codex-gsfa/mcp"
    }
  }
}
What this endpoint actually serves

tools/list at https://gateway.pipeworx.io/codex-gsfa/mcp returns the tools in the table above plus the shared Pipeworx meta-tools — ask_pipeworx, discover_tools, search_within, remember/recall and the rest of the gateway-wide set. So the tool count you see is larger than this table: a single-pack endpoint currently lists roughly 30 shared tools alongside the pack's own. The connection's initialize response states its exact scope, and is the authoritative answer for a given day.

This is deliberate, not multiplexing by accident. The meta-tools are what let a scoped connection answer a question this pack does not cover — via ask_pipeworx, which routes across the whole catalog — without you adding a second MCP server. There is currently no way to mount a pack endpoint without them; if the extra schemas cost you more context than the routing is worth, connect to the full gateway once rather than to several pack endpoints.

Or connect to the full Pipeworx gateway to get every pack's tools listed directly, instead of just this one's:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "pipeworx": {
      "url": "https://gateway.pipeworx.io/mcp"
    }
  }
}

Both URLs reach the same gateway and the same 1831+ data sources. The only difference is which pack's tools are listed directly; ask_pipeworx reaches all of them from either one.

No MCP client? Call it over HTTP

curl -X POST https://gateway.pipeworx.io/v1/tools/gsfa_check_use \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  -d '{"additive":"461","food_category":"14.1.5"}'

No account needed for the first calls. Inspect any tool: GET https://gateway.pipeworx.io/v1/tools/gsfa_check_use. Find one: POST https://gateway.pipeworx.io/v1/tools/search_packs with {"query":"..."}.

Standalone (no gateway account)

This package also runs as a local stdio MCP server — no Pipeworx account, no gateway round-trip:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "codex-gsfa": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@pipeworx/mcp-codex-gsfa"]
    }
  }
}

Or run it directly to confirm it starts:

npx -y @pipeworx/mcp-codex-gsfa

It speaks MCP over stdin/stdout and answers initialize/tools/list/tools/call for only this pack's tools — none of the shared meta-tools the gateway connection above adds. Same source, same tools, no ask_pipeworx routing.

Using with ask_pipeworx

Instead of calling tools directly, you can ask questions in plain English — this works on the pack endpoint above as well as on the full gateway:

ask_pipeworx({ question: "your question about Codex Gsfa data" })

The gateway picks the right tool and fills the arguments automatically.

More

License

MIT

Comments

Markdown supported

New to MCP?

From what the protocol is to installing your first server, these answers cover most first questions.

An open protocol that defines how AI applications connect to external tools and data in a uniform way. Clients talk to the model; MCP servers provide tools, resources and prompt templates. They exchange standard messages, so one server can be reused by many clients.