Is Adaptive Cards MCP safe to use?

Adaptive Cards MCP has an HVTrust score of 16.7/100 (Grade D), ranked #1200 of 1283 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Adaptive Cards MCP?

Adaptive Cards MCP scores 16.7/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 31 GitHub stars and is categorized under MCP Servers.

Adaptive Cards MCP

VikrantSingh01/adaptive-cards-mcp

AI-powered Adaptive Card MCP server — 9 tools for generating, validating, optimizing cards for Teams, Outlook, Copilot,

MCP Servers TypeScript Grade D Listed MIT

16.7/100

Rank #1200 of 1283

Compare Adaptive Cards MCP

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

Open compare tool Suggest correction

Listing state

Listed

Evidence coverage

Grade D · 1/5 signals

Last push

2026-06-20 · 53d ago

Recent change

Rank +1

Is Adaptive Cards MCP safe? Adaptive Cards MCP scores 16.7/100 (Grade D), ranked #1200 of 1283 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage D (1 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; no OSSF Scorecard result yet; 6% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-06-20. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in MCP Servers

#695 MCP Server Motherduck — 16.7 (D) → #696 MCP Server Spec Driven Development — 16.7 (D) → #698 Aigroup Mdtoword MCP — 16.7 (D) → #699 DevDocs — 16.6 (D) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.

Recent Changes

2026-08-10

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 74 spots (#1125 → #1199)

2026-08-08

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #1120

Maintainer Checklist

Add Scorecard coverage Expose the repository to OpenSSF Scorecard checks so supply-chain posture is easier to verify.

Publish provenance Add package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.

Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.

Refresh maintenance signals The repo was last pushed 53 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.

Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Adaptive Cards MCP View MCP Servers Report missing data

30.7

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#697

In MCP Servers

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade D reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage D is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (1 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-12

Activity & Reach

Stars

Forks

Last Push

2026-06-20

53 days ago

Commits (4 wk)

Downloads (7d)

—

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

Rank Change

▼1

was #1199

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs MCP Servers

16.7 / 100 · 40.0% confidence

Adaptive Cards MCP MCP Servers average (761 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

0.3 / 25

4.7 below avg 5.0

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

2.5 below avg 13.3

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

8.5 / 17

in line with avg 8.8

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

8.5 / 20

3.9 below avg 12.4

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

3.6 / 20

2.2 below avg 5.8

Activity Inputs

30.7 / 100

StarsRepository reach

9.0 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

17.6 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

0.0 / 25

CommunityFork signal

3.9 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

None

No package attestations found

OSSF Scorecard

—

Not available

Signed Commits

of last 100 commits verified

Is Adaptive Cards MCP safe?

Public trust evidence for Adaptive Cards MCP is thin: several supply-chain signals are missing or weak. This does not mean the project is unsafe — it means an outside observer cannot easily verify the usual integrity checks. Treat with extra scrutiny.

Does Adaptive Cards MCP publish package provenance?

No published build provenance is currently detected for Adaptive Cards MCP. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.

Does Adaptive Cards MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for Adaptive Cards MCP. Maintainers can enable the Scorecard GitHub Action to get a public score; without it, automated supply-chain hygiene is harder for outsiders to verify.

Is Adaptive Cards MCP actively maintained?

Slowing down. Last push was 53 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.

What license does Adaptive Cards MCP use?

Adaptive Cards MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Adaptive Cards MCP's commits signed?

5% of the last 100 commits to Adaptive Cards MCP are verified-signed (GPG, SSH, S/MIME, or GitHub's signing flow). Signed commits help confirm that code was authored by who the commit claims.

Not a safety endorsement. HVTracker describes what public signals show, not whether a project is safe for your use case. Run your own security review before adopting in production.

AI agent surface

MCP, providers, tool surface

Scored in HVTrust

These runtime-trust fields — detected from public repo docs and manifests — contribute a bounded adjustment to this project's HVTrust score alongside supply-chain evidence. The exact values each field can add or subtract are documented in the methodology → Compare this surface across every listed agent in the capability matrix →

MCP Server Support

high confidence

Implemented

Adaptive Cards MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

high confidence

3 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.

Tool / Plugin Surface

None detected

No clear plugin system or broad tool surface detected.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

Package Provenance Drift

high confidence

Match

Published package metadata matches the tracked repo

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live

Maintain Adaptive Cards MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Adaptive Cards MCP from public signals only — we never contact maintainers first. If a signal is wrong, stale, or missing (provenance you publish, a Scorecard you run, signed releases), tell us and we'll review it. Corrections are public and tracked on GitHub.

Submit a correction → Add the trust badge

Reputation Timeline

Signal history

2026-08-10

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 74 spots (#1125 → #1199)

2026-08-08

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #1120

GitHub → npm: adaptive-cards-mcp

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

Markdown:
            [![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/adaptive-cards-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/adaptive-cards-mcp)
            
HTML:
            <a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/adaptive-cards-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/adaptive-cards-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance)
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON