updated 2026-08-12 05:02 UTC

Context+

forloopcodes/contextplus

Semantic Intelligence for Large-Scale Engineering. Context+ is an MCP server designed for developers who demand 99% accu

MCP Servers TypeScript Grade D Listed MIT
19.8/100
Rank #1083 of 1283
Compare Context+

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
2026-07-13 · 30d ago
Recent change
New

Is Context+ safe? Context+ scores 19.8/100 (Grade D), ranked #1083 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; 26% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-07-13. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in MCP Servers

#598 PostgreSQL MCP Server — 19.8 (D) → #599 ConnectWise Manage — 19.8 (D) → #601 Cortex Gateway — 19.8 (D) → #602 CleanSlice — 19.8 (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
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1080
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.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Context+ View MCP Servers Report missing data
57.1
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#600
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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-08-12 05:02 UTC · Repo last pushed 30 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-12

Activity & Reach

Stars
2.0k
Forks
167
Last Push
2026-07-13
30 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
2
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
1
Rank Change
▲2
was #1085

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs MCP Servers

19.8 / 100 · 50.0% confidence

Context+ MCP Servers average (761 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
1.3 / 25
3.7 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
11.9 / 20
0.5 below avg 12.4
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
7.9 / 20
2.1 above avg 5.8

Activity Inputs

57.1 / 100
StarsRepository reach
19.8 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
20.8 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
6.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
10.3 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
26%
of last 100 commits verified

Is Context+ safe?

Public trust evidence for Context+ 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 Context+ publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Context+. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Context+ have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for Context+. 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 Context+ actively maintained?
Maintained. Last push was 30 days ago.
What license does Context+ use?
Context+ ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Context+'s commits signed?
26% of the last 100 commits to Context+ 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
Context+ appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
2 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Extensions
Extension based plugin/integration surface detected.
  • code
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
N/A
No package source configured
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
  • MCP signal live
  • External deps live
  • Tool / plugin surface live
  • Package provenance drift live

Maintain Context+?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Context+ 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
Listed 1
2026-08-10
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1080
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 19.8 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/context.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/context)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/context"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/context.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

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