updated 2026-10-16 16:07 UTC

ArcGIS MCP Bridge

Repository

Secure, local-first MCP server exposing ArcGIS Pro's ArcPy engine over stdio JSON-RPC.

MCP Servers Python Listed Apache-2.0

Is ArcGIS MCP Bridge safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 45%
Last push 14d ago
Advisories None known
Compare ArcGIS MCP Bridge

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: ArcGIS MCP Bridge scores 60.5/100 (Grade C), ranked #667 of 1378 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 6.2/10; 45% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (arcgis-mcp-bridge); last pushed 2026-10-02. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How ArcGIS MCP Bridge could raise its score

Each line changes one public signal and recomputes with the live scoring function. The gains don't add up exactly, because the score is capped near the top.

Already done? Suggest a correctionAdd the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships ArcGIS MCP Bridge and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the package you install. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.

  1. Source Partly signed

    github.com/muend/arcgis-mcp-bridge, Apache-2.0, last pushed 2026-10-02. 45% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 6.2/10 (scanned Oct 9, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review0
    • Branch Protection3
    • Signed Releases0
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions9
    • Pinned Dependencies0
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 3
    CI-Tests 10
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 0
    Contributors 3
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 10
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 10
    Packaging -1
    Pinned-Dependencies 0
    SAST 10
    Security-Policy 4
    Signed-Releases 0
    Token-Permissions 9
    Vulnerabilities 10

  3. Published packages Linked, not attested

    Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.

  4. What you install today No known advisories

    Latest release checked: arcgis-mcp-bridge 0.6.8. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-15).

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-09-01 OSSF Scorecard: 5.4/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

  • GitHub repository data
  • Package downloads
  • Supply-chain checks
  • Public actions (missing)
  • Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues ArcGIS MCP Bridge’s score as an Ed25519-signed credential, valid for 7 days. You can check it offline against HVTracker’s published key; if anyone changes a number after signing, verification fails.

Signed credential (JSON) How to verify

What this score doesn’t check

It covers who ships the code, not what the code does. It doesn’t read tool descriptions or prompts for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you connect it, such as Cisco MCP Scanner or Snyk Agent Scan.

How ArcGIS MCP Bridge compares in MCP Servers

  1. #360 Laravel MCP Companion 60.6 +0.1
  2. #361 Google Maps MCP Server 60.6 +0.1
  3. #362 ArcGIS MCP Bridge 60.5 this agent
  4. #363 Switzerland MCP 🇨🇭 60.5 ±0
  5. #364 Drawio MCP 60.4 −0.1

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks ArcGIS MCP Bridge’s 60.5.

Where the 60.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

60.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

ArcGIS MCP Bridge MCP Servers average (781 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
10.0 / 25
0.5 below avg 10.5
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
2.7 below avg 13.5
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.8 / 17
1.5 above avg 12.3
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
13.9 / 20
1.6 above avg 12.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
6.0 / 20
1.4 below avg 7.4

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-10
Rank Moved
Rank rose 25 spots (#662 → #637)
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#648 → #662)
2026-10-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 49 spots (#681 → #632)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 6.2/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
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.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for ArcGIS MCP Bridge View MCP Servers Report missing data
42.3
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#362
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 C reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage B is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (3 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Signals refreshed 2026-10-16 16:07 UTC · Repo last pushed 14 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-16

Activity & Reach

Stars
22
Forks
2
Last Push
2026-10-02
14 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
4
Downloads (7d)
104
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
0
Rank Change
▼3
was #664

Analysis

Activity Inputs

42.3 / 100
StarsRepository reach
8.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
23.1 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
8.7 / 25
CommunityFork signal
2.2 / 20

Common questions about ArcGIS MCP Bridge

ArcGIS MCP Bridge has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.
Does ArcGIS MCP Bridge publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for ArcGIS MCP Bridge. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does ArcGIS MCP Bridge have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
ArcGIS MCP Bridge has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.2/10. The Scorecard checks for branch protection, signed releases, dependency updates, fuzzing, code review, and other supply-chain hygiene items. See the full check breakdown on this page.
Is ArcGIS MCP Bridge actively maintained?
Maintained. Last push was 14 days ago.
What license does ArcGIS MCP Bridge use?
ArcGIS MCP Bridge ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are ArcGIS MCP Bridge's commits signed?
44% of the last 100 commits to ArcGIS MCP Bridge 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
ArcGIS MCP Bridge appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency detected.
Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
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
How this surface has changed

Detected changes to ArcGIS MCP Bridge's runtime surface and supply-chain posture, from daily public-signal snapshots. A change here means our detectors see something different — a genuinely changed capability, or better evidence of an existing one.

2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented

Maintain ArcGIS MCP Bridge?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores ArcGIS MCP Bridge 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
Rank 30HVTrust 4Listed 2Score 2Grade 2Scorecard 1Delisted 1MCP 1
2026-10-10
Rank Moved
Rank rose 25 spots (#662 → #637)
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#648 → #662)
2026-10-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 49 spots (#681 → #632)
2026-10-02
Rank Moved
Rank rose 21 spots (#702 → #681)
2026-10-01
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 50 spots (#652 → #702)
2026-09-27
Rank Moved
Rank rose 19 spots (#662 → #643)
2026-09-26
Rank Moved
Rank rose 14 spots (#676 → #662)
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → C
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank rose 245 spots (#908 → #663)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 31.8pts (26.6 → 58.4)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #908
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-19
Rank Moved
Rank rose 115 spots (#766 → #651)
2026-09-19
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 3.5pts (55.2 → 58.7)
2026-09-19
Activity Score Changed
Activity score up 10pts (28 → 38)
2026-09-16
Rank Moved
Rank rose 12 spots (#775 → #763)
2026-09-12
Rank Moved
Rank rose 48 spots (#808 → #760)
2026-09-11
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#796 → #808)
2026-09-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#783 → #796)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 36 spots (#739 → #775)
2026-09-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 51 spots (#688 → #739)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 87 spots (#601 → #688)
2026-09-04
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → C
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank rose 483 spots (#1084 → #601)
2026-09-04
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 18.1pts (37.4 → 55.5)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 55 spots (#1029 → #1084)
2026-09-02
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 42 spots (#987 → #1029)
2026-09-01
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 5.4/10
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank rose 236 spots (#1223 → #987)
2026-09-01
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 17.1pts (20.4 → 37.5)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 22 spots (#1201 → #1223)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 22 spots (#1179 → #1201)
2026-08-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 42 spots (#1137 → #1179)
2026-08-29
Activity Score Changed
Activity score down 5pts (38 → 33)
2026-08-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 26 spots (#1111 → #1137)
2026-08-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#1098 → #1111)
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 74 spots (#1024 → #1098)
2026-08-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#1010 → #1022)
2026-08-19
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 23 spots (#991 → #1014)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 28 spots (#963 → #991)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 57 spots (#900 → #957)
2026-08-08
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #892
GitHub → PyPI: arcgis-mcp-bridge

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 60.5 Grade C
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/arcgis-mcp-bridge.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/arcgis-mcp-bridge)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/arcgis-mcp-bridge"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/arcgis-mcp-bridge.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON