GitMCP

Put an end to code hallucinations! GitMCP is a free, open-source, remote MCP server for any GitHub project

MCP Servers TypeScript Grade D Listed Apache-2.0
47.2/100
Rank #504 of 1308
Compare GitMCP

Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

Open compare tool Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
Evidence coverage
Grade C · 2/5 signals
Last push
2026-05-08 · 103d ago
Recent change
Rank +3

Is GitMCP safe? GitMCP scores 47.2/100 (Grade D), ranked #504 of 1308 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 4.2/10; 92% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-05-08. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in MCP Servers

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-08-19
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#492 → #504)
2026-08-17
Rank Moved
Rank rose 11 spots (#502 → #491)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#492 → #502)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 4.2/10. 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.
Refresh maintenance signals The repo was last pushed 103 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.
47.7
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#180

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 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 2026-08-19 05:32 UTC · Repo last pushed 103 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-19

Activity & Reach

Stars
8.3k
Forks
745
Last Push
2026-05-08
103 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
HN mentions (30d)
Open Issues
56
Rank Change
▼12
was #492

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs MCP Servers

47.2 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

GitMCP MCP Servers average (775 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
9.8 / 25
4.8 above 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
12.1 / 17
3.3 above avg 8.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
5.1 / 20
7.3 below avg 12.4
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
9.4 / 20
3.6 above avg 5.8

Activity Inputs

47.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
23.5 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
10.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
13.4 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
4.2 / 10
OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 18, 2026
Signed Commits
92%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts 10
Branch-Protection 1
CI-Tests 2
CII-Best-Practices 0
Code-Review 3
Contributors 6
Dangerous-Workflow 10
Dependency-Update-Tool 10
Fuzzing 0
License 10
Maintained 0
Packaging -1
Pinned-Dependencies 0
SAST 2
Security-Policy 10
Signed-Releases -1
Token-Permissions 0
Vulnerabilities 0

Is GitMCP safe?

Public trust evidence for GitMCP 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 GitMCP publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for GitMCP. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does GitMCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
GitMCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 4.2/10. 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 GitMCP actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 103 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does GitMCP use?
GitMCP ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are GitMCP's commits signed?
92% of the last 100 commits to GitMCP 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
GitMCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
5 detected
Public provider/service dependencies 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
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
How this surface has changed

Detected changes to GitMCP'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.

2026-08-06
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days

Maintain GitMCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores GitMCP 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.

Reputation Timeline

Signal history
Rank 8Grade 2Listed 1HVTrust 1Scorecard 1Stale 1
2026-08-19
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#492 → #504)
2026-08-17
Rank Moved
Rank rose 11 spots (#502 → #491)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#492 → #502)
2026-08-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#476 → #491)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#468 → #485)
2026-08-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 118 spots (#346 → #464)
2026-08-06
Activity Went Stale
No commits for 90 days
2026-08-01
Grade Changed
Trust grade C → D
2026-07-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#305 → #315)
2026-07-15
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 4.5/10
2026-07-15
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → C
2026-07-15
Rank Moved
Rank rose 112 spots (#406 → #294)
2026-07-15
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 29.8pts (21.3 → 51.1)
2026-07-14
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #406

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 47.2 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/gitmcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/gitmcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/gitmcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/gitmcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

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 v4.3 · Raw JSON