updated 2026-08-06 07:30 UTC

GitHub MCP Server

github/github-mcp-server

GitHub's official MCP Server

Protocols & Tool Integration Go Grade B Listed MIT
65.1/100
Rank #154 of 468
Compare GitHub MCP Server

How does it stack up against its Protocols & Tool Integration neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

Open compare tool Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
Evidence coverage
Grade C · 2/5 signals
Last push
2026-08-06 · 0d ago
Recent change
No recent signal change

Is GitHub MCP Server safe? GitHub MCP Server scores 65.1/100 (Grade B), ranked #154 of 468 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage C (2 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 6.5/10; 50% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-06. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Protocols & Tool Integration

#13 MCP C# SDK — 66.9 (B) → #14 Microsoft MCP Catalog — 66.0 (B) → #16 AG-UI — 65.0 (B) → #17 Context7 — 64.7 (C) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#109 → #125)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 6.5/10. 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.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for GitHub MCP Server View Protocols & Tool Integration Report missing data
90.6
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#15
In Protocols & Tool Integration

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade B reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage C is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (2 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Signals refreshed 2026-08-06 07:30 UTC · Repo last pushed today

Rank Trend

2026-07-05 2026-08-06

Activity & Reach

Stars
32.0k
Forks
4.7k
Last Push
2026-08-06
today
Commits (4 wk)
52
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
175
Rank Change
=
was #154

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Protocols & Tool Integration

65.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

GitHub MCP Server Protocols & Tool Integration average (35 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
10.6 / 25
0.9 below avg 11.5
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
1.2 below avg 12.0
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
14.0 / 17
1.2 above avg 12.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
18.9 / 20
3.6 above avg 15.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
10.8 / 20
0.5 below avg 11.3

Activity Inputs

90.6 / 100
StarsRepository reach
27.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
21.5 / 25
CommunityFork signal
17.1 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
6.5 / 10
OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 5, 2026
Signed Commits
50%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts 10
Branch-Protection 8
CI-Tests 9
CII-Best-Practices 0
Code-Review 8
Contributors 10
Dangerous-Workflow 10
Dependency-Update-Tool 10
Fuzzing 0
License 10
Maintained 10
Packaging 10
Pinned-Dependencies 5
SAST 9
Security-Policy 10
Signed-Releases 0
Token-Permissions 0
Vulnerabilities 0

Is GitHub MCP Server safe?

GitHub MCP Server 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 GitHub MCP Server publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for GitHub MCP Server. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does GitHub MCP Server have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
GitHub MCP Server has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.5/10. 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 GitHub MCP Server actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does GitHub MCP Server use?
GitHub MCP Server ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are GitHub MCP Server's commits signed?
50% of the last 100 commits to GitHub MCP Server 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
GitHub MCP Server 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: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Extensions
Extension based plugin/integration surface detected.
  • code
  • search
  • shell
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 GitHub MCP Server?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores GitHub MCP Server 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
Grade 4Rank 3Listed 1HVTrust 1Scorecard 1
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#109 → #125)
2026-07-06
Grade Changed
Trust grade C → B
2026-07-03
Grade Changed
Trust grade C → B
2026-07-02
Grade Changed
Trust grade B → C
2026-06-22
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 6.8/10
2026-06-22
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → B
2026-06-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 146 spots (#253 → #107)
2026-06-22
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 40.1pts (26.0 → 66.1)
2026-06-21
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#237 → #253)
2026-06-20
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #237
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 65.1 Grade B
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/github-mcp-server.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/github-mcp-server)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/github-mcp-server"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/github-mcp-server.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Protocols & Tool Integration

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.2 · Raw JSON