updated 2026-10-16 20:06 UTC

Gemini MCP

Repository

MCP Server that enables Claude code to interact with Gemini

MCP Servers TypeScript Listed MIT

Is Gemini MCP safe? Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

OSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 29%
Last push 100d ago
Advisories None known
Compare Gemini MCP

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Gemini MCP scores 47.3/100 (Grade D), ranked #1074 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 3.3/10; 29% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (@rlabs-inc/gemini-mcp); last pushed 2026-07-08. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Gemini 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 Gemini 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/RLabs-Inc/gemini-mcp, MIT, last pushed 2026-07-08. 29% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Weak

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 3.3/10 (scanned Oct 5, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review3
    • Branch Protection0
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflown/a
    • Token Permissionsn/a
    • Pinned Dependenciesn/a
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 0
    CI-Tests 0
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 3
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow -1
    Dependency-Update-Tool 10
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 1
    Packaging -1
    Pinned-Dependencies -1
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 0
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions -1
    Vulnerabilities 0

  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: @rlabs-inc/gemini-mcp 0.8.1. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-16).

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-09-08 OSSF Scorecard: 3.3/10

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 Gemini 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 Gemini MCP compares in MCP Servers

  1. #612 CVE MCP Server 47.4 +0.1
  2. #613 Zapier 47.3 ±0
  3. #614 Gemini MCP 47.3 this agent
  4. #615 Balldontlie Api MCP 47.2 −0.1
  5. #616 Openfate MCP 47.1 −0.2

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Gemini MCP’s 47.3.

Where the 47.3 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

47.3 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Gemini MCP MCP Servers average (781 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
5.6 / 25
4.9 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
11.3 / 17
1.0 below avg 12.3
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
5.3 / 20
7.0 below avg 12.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
9.3 / 20
1.9 above avg 7.4

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#1021 → #1036)
2026-10-06
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days
2026-09-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#986 → #996)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 3.3/10. 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.
Refresh maintenance signals The repo was last pushed 100 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Gemini MCP View MCP Servers Report missing data
32.9
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#614
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 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 20:06 UTC · Repo last pushed 100 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-16

Activity & Reach

Stars
218
Forks
46
Last Push
2026-07-08
100 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
544
npm
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
5
Rank Change
▼4
was #1070

Analysis

Activity Inputs

32.9 / 100
StarsRepository reach
14.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
11.1 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
7.8 / 20

Common questions about Gemini MCP

Public trust evidence for Gemini 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 Gemini MCP publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Gemini 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 Gemini MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Gemini MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 3.3/10. 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 Gemini MCP actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 100 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does Gemini MCP use?
Gemini MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Gemini MCP's commits signed?
29% of the last 100 commits to Gemini 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
Gemini MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
1 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
How this surface has changed

Detected changes to Gemini MCP'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.

2026-10-06
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Google Gemini
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented

Maintain Gemini MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Gemini 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
Rank 23HVTrust 3Listed 2Scorecard 1Delisted 1MCP 1Surface 1Stale 1
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#1021 → #1036)
2026-10-06
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days
2026-09-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#986 → #996)
2026-09-25
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#971 → #982)
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Google Gemini
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank rose 204 spots (#1174 → #970)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 28.5pts (20.1 → 48.6)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1174
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-15
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#941 → #953)
2026-09-12
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#937 → #949)
2026-09-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#914 → #929)
2026-09-08
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 3.3/10
2026-09-08
Rank Moved
Rank rose 352 spots (#1266 → #914)
2026-09-08
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 19.3pts (30.2 → 49.5)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1256 → #1266)
2026-09-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#1239 → #1256)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#1220 → #1239)
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank rose 78 spots (#1298 → #1220)
2026-09-04
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 11.5pts (18.8 → 30.3)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#1285 → #1298)
2026-09-02
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#1271 → #1285)
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#1256 → #1271)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 18 spots (#1238 → #1256)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 18 spots (#1220 → #1238)
2026-08-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#1207 → #1220)
2026-08-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#1190 → #1207)
2026-08-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#1178 → #1190)
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 51 spots (#1127 → #1178)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 26 spots (#1099 → #1125)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 62 spots (#1036 → #1098)
2026-08-08
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1029
GitHub → npm: @rlabs-inc/gemini-mcp

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 47.3 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/gemini-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/gemini-mcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/gemini-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/gemini-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

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