updated 2026-10-13 04:10 UTC

Codebase Memory MCP

Repository Website

High-performance code intelligence MCP server. Indexes codebases into a persistent knowledge graph — average repo in milliseconds. 158 languages, sub-ms queries, 99% fewer tokens. Single static binary, zero dependencies.

MCP Servers C Listed MIT

Is Codebase Memory MCP safe? Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

OSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
Provenance Attested
Signed commits 28%
Last push today
Advisories None known
Compare Codebase Memory MCP

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Codebase Memory MCP scores 90.3/100 (Grade A), ranked #20 of 1371 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: its packages ship with cryptographic provenance; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 7.3/10; 28% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (codebase-memory-mcp, codebase-memory-mcp); last pushed 2026-10-13. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Codebase Memory MCP 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 Codebase Memory MCP 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/DeusData/codebase-memory-mcp, MIT, last pushed 2026-10-13. 28% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Strong

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 7.3/10 (scanned Oct 13, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review0
    • Branch Protectionn/a
    • Signed Releases0
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions10
    • Pinned Dependencies9
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection -1
    CI-Tests 10
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 0
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 10
    Fuzzing 10
    License 10
    Maintained 10
    Packaging 10
    Pinned-Dependencies 9
    SAST 8
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases 0
    Token-Permissions 10
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages Partly attested

  4. What you install today No known advisories

    Latest releases checked: codebase-memory-mcp 0.11.0, codebase-memory-mcp 0.11.0. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-13).

Changes to this chain

No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Codebase Memory MCP.

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 Codebase Memory MCP’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 Codebase Memory MCP compares in MCP Servers

  1. #1 Mobile MCP 92.3 +2.0
  2. #2 Playwright MCP 91.5 +1.2
  3. #3 Codebase Memory MCP 90.3 this agent
  4. #4 SearXNG Search 89.3 −1.0
  5. #5 Apify MCP Server 89.3 −1.0

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Codebase Memory MCP’s 90.3.

Where the 90.3 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

90.3 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Codebase Memory MCP MCP Servers average (781 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
18.0 / 25
7.6 above avg 10.4
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
18.0 / 18
4.5 above avg 13.5
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
14.7 / 17
2.5 above avg 12.2
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
20.0 / 20
7.8 above avg 12.2
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
15.4 / 20
8.0 above avg 7.4

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Increase the share of verified signed commits for clearer maintainer identity.
Maintainer Checklist
Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
Compare with Mobile MCP Get email alerts for Codebase Memory MCP View MCP Servers Report missing data
94.7
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#3
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 A 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 2026-10-13 04:10 UTC · Repo last pushed today

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-13

Activity & Reach

Stars
46.5k
Forks
3.8k
Last Push
2026-10-13
today
Commits (4 wk)
982
Downloads (7d)
1,407
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
475
Rank Change
▲1
was #21

Analysis

Activity Inputs

94.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
28.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
16.7 / 20

Common questions about Codebase Memory MCP

Public supply-chain signals for Codebase Memory MCP are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but Codebase Memory MCP carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does Codebase Memory MCP publish package provenance?
Yes. Codebase Memory MCP's package releases carry build provenance attestations, which cryptographically link the published package back to its source repository and CI workflow.
Does Codebase Memory MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Codebase Memory MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 7.3/10. 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 Codebase Memory MCP actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Codebase Memory MCP use?
Codebase Memory MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Codebase Memory MCP's commits signed?
28% of the last 100 commits to Codebase Memory 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.

Compare Codebase Memory MCP head-to-head

Codebase Memory MCP vs Mobile MCP → Codebase Memory MCP vs Playwright MCP → Codebase Memory MCP vs SearXNG Search →

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
medium confidence
Implemented
Codebase Memory MCP 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

Maintain Codebase Memory MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Codebase Memory 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
GitHub → Website → PyPI: codebase-memory-mcp npm: codebase-memory-mcp

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 90.3 Grade A
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/codebase-memory-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/codebase-memory-mcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/codebase-memory-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/codebase-memory-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

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