LibreNMS MCP

MCP server for LibreNMS management

MCP Servers Python Grade A Listed MIT
81.0/100
Rank #86 of 1320
Compare LibreNMS MCP

Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

Open compare tool Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
Evidence coverage
Grade B · 3/5 signals
Last push
2026-09-02 · 2d ago
Recent change
Grade Changed +1

Is LibreNMS MCP safe? LibreNMS MCP scores 81.0/100 (Grade A), ranked #86 of 1320 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 5.8/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-09-02. 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
Improve adoption to lift the weakest part of the trust profile.
Recent Changes
2026-09-03
Grade Changed
Trust grade B → A
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 18 spots (#103 → #85)
2026-08-26
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 5.8/10
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.8/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
52.8
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#31

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade A 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 2026-09-04 22:32 UTC · Repo last pushed 2 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-09-04

Activity & Reach

Stars
37
Forks
9
Last Push
2026-09-02
2 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
12
Downloads (7d)
3,342
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
Open Issues
0
Rank Change
▼1
was #85

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs MCP Servers

81.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

LibreNMS MCP MCP Servers average (778 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
19.8 / 25
10.2 above avg 9.6
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
18.0 / 18
4.6 above avg 13.4
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.4 / 17
1.6 above avg 11.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
16.3 / 20
4.1 above avg 12.2
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
8.5 / 20
2.2 above avg 6.3

Activity Inputs

52.8 / 100
StarsRepository reach
9.5 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
13.9 / 25
CommunityFork signal
4.7 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
Verified
pypi attestation
OSSF Scorecard
5.8 / 10
OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 26, 2026
Signed Commits
100%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts 10
Branch-Protection 3
CI-Tests 10
CII-Best-Practices 0
Code-Review 0
Contributors 0
Dangerous-Workflow 10
Dependency-Update-Tool 10
Fuzzing 0
License 10
Maintained 10
Packaging 10
Pinned-Dependencies 0
SAST 9
Security-Policy 0
Signed-Releases -1
Token-Permissions 0
Vulnerabilities 10

Is LibreNMS MCP safe?

Public supply-chain signals for LibreNMS MCP are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but LibreNMS MCP carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does LibreNMS MCP publish package provenance?
Yes. LibreNMS MCP's package releases carry build provenance attestations, which cryptographically link the published package back to its source repository and CI workflow.
Does LibreNMS MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
LibreNMS MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.8/10. 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 LibreNMS MCP actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).
What license does LibreNMS MCP use?
LibreNMS MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are LibreNMS MCP's commits signed?
100% of the last 100 commits to LibreNMS 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
LibreNMS MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
low confidence
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency 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

Maintain LibreNMS MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores LibreNMS 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
Rank 9Listed 1HVTrust 1Scorecard 1Grade 1
2026-09-03
Grade Changed
Trust grade B → A
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 18 spots (#103 → #85)
2026-08-26
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 5.8/10
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank rose 126 spots (#213 → #87)
2026-08-26
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 12.1pts (66.2 → 78.3)
2026-08-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#198 → #214)
2026-08-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 16 spots (#215 → #199)
2026-08-19
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#201 → #213)
2026-08-17
Rank Moved
Rank rose 17 spots (#213 → #196)
2026-08-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#187 → #206)
2026-08-12
Rank Moved
Rank rose 14 spots (#201 → #187)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#199 → #214)
2026-08-08
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #197

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 81.0 Grade A
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/librenms-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/librenms-mcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/librenms-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/librenms-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

Data sources
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 v4.3 · Raw JSON