Glade MCP
Website
Connect any MCP-compatible AI client (Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf) to Unity or Godot. 275+ granular tools, an editor aware system prompt, game design document project context, script semantic search, and skill calibration.
Is Glade MCP safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare Glade MCP
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: Glade MCP scores 64.1/100 (Grade C), ranked #569 of 1374 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 3.2/10; 4% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-11-01. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How Glade 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.
- Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 3.2 to 9.0lowest checks: Branch-Protection 0, CI-Tests 0, CII-Best-Practices 0 +12.1 → 76.2 B · #144 of 778
- Sign every commit4% signed today +4.8 → 68.9 B · #230 of 778
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Glade 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.
-
Source Partly signed
github.com/Glade-tool/glade-mcp, MIT, last pushed 2026-11-01. 4% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.
-
Review and release Weak
OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 3.2/10 (scanned Nov 6, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review0
- Branch Protection0
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies0
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 10Branch-Protection 0CI-Tests 0CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 0Contributors 6Dangerous-Workflow 10Dependency-Update-Tool 0Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 10Packaging 10Pinned-Dependencies 0SAST 0Security-Policy 0Signed-Releases 0Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 0 -
Published packages Partly attested
- PyPI gladekit-mcp Source link isn't a GitHub repo Build provenance attested
Changes to this chain
- 2026-09-23 Package provenance attestation detected
- 2026-08-29 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 Glade 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.
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 Glade MCP compares in MCP Servers
- #321 Google Analytics MCP 64.1 ±0
- #322 Clarifyprompt MCP 64.1 ±0
- #323 Glade MCP 64.1 this agent
- #324 .NET MCP Server 64.0 −0.1
- #325 Whoop MCP 63.9 −0.2
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Glade MCP’s 64.1.
Where the 64.1 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
64.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceGlade MCP MCP Servers average (778 agents)
Quick Trust Read
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade C 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 →
Rank Trend
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
52.6 / 100Common questions about Glade MCP
Does Glade MCP publish package provenance?
Does Glade MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is Glade MCP actively maintained?
What license does Glade MCP use?
Are Glade MCP's commits signed?
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
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 signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Detected changes to Glade 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.
Maintain Glade MCP?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores Glade 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.
Reputation Timeline
Signal history
Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →
For maintainers
[](https://hvtracker.net/agents/glade-mcp)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/glade-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/glade-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in MCP Servers
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON