updated 2026-10-16 20:06 UTC

Logoloom

Repository by mcpware

AI-powered logo design → SVG → full brand kit. Free, local, MCP-native.

MCP Servers JavaScript Listed MIT

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

OSSF Scorecard 3.6 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 0%
Last push 207d ago
Compare Logoloom

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Logoloom scores 30.7/100 (Grade D), ranked #1329 of 1378 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 3.6/10; recent commits are unsigned; last pushed 2026-03-23. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Logoloom 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 Logoloom and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the code you run. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.

  1. Source Unsigned

    github.com/mcpware/logoloom, MIT, last pushed 2026-03-23. None of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so no change traces to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Weak

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 3.6/10 (scanned Oct 16, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review0
    • Branch Protection0
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions9
    • Pinned Dependencies1
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 0
    CI-Tests -1
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 0
    Contributors 6
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 0
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 0
    Packaging 10
    Pinned-Dependencies 1
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 0
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 9
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages None

    No registry package. Logoloom is used from its repository, so what you run is whatever you check out: pin a release tag or commit.

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-09-02 OSSF Scorecard: 3.6/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage C: 2 of 5 independent evidence types found.

  • GitHub repository data
  • Package downloads (missing)
  • Supply-chain checks
  • Public actions (missing)
  • Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Logoloom’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 Logoloom compares in MCP Servers

  1. #767 ByteAsk Embedded MCP 31.5 +0.8
  2. #768 Operant MCP 31.1 +0.4
  3. #769 Logoloom 30.7 this agent
  4. #770 MCP Server Taiwan Weather 30.7 ±0
  5. #771 PapersFlow 30.6 −0.1

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Logoloom’s 30.7.

Where the 30.7 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

30.7 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Logoloom MCP Servers average (781 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
4.5 / 25
6.0 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
11.6 / 17
0.7 below avg 12.3
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
0 / 20
12.3 below avg 12.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
4.1 / 20
3.3 below 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 10 spots (#1299 → #1309)
2026-09-23
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Anthropic
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 3.6/10. 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 207 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Logoloom View MCP Servers Report missing data
15.1
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#769
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 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 2026-10-16 20:06 UTC · Repo last pushed 207 days ago — may be stale

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-16

Activity & Reach

Stars
48
Forks
11
Last Push
2026-03-23
207 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
1
Rank Change
▼1
was #1328

Analysis

Activity Inputs

15.1 / 100
StarsRepository reach
10.1 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
0.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
5.0 / 20

Common questions about Logoloom

Public trust evidence for Logoloom 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 Logoloom publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Logoloom. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Logoloom have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Logoloom has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 3.6/10. 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 Logoloom actively maintained?
Stale. The repository has not been pushed to in 207 days. Consider whether the project is still being maintained.
What license does Logoloom use?
Logoloom ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Logoloom's commits signed?
0% of the last 100 commits to Logoloom 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
medium confidence
Declared
MCP support appears present, but direct server implementation is less certain.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
medium confidence
1 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
medium confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration 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 Logoloom'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.

2026-09-23
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Anthropic
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → declared

Maintain Logoloom?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Logoloom 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 11Listed 2HVTrust 2Scorecard 1Delisted 1MCP 1Surface 1Surface 1
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1299 → #1309)
2026-09-23
Tool Surface Changed
Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Anthropic
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → declared
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 192 spots (#1093 → #1285)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 8.2pts (22.3 → 30.5)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1093
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#1253 → #1265)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#1242 → #1253)
2026-09-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#1225 → #1242)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 22 spots (#1203 → #1225)
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#1186 → #1203)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 43 spots (#1143 → #1186)
2026-09-02
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 3.6/10
2026-09-02
Rank Moved
Rank rose 172 spots (#1315 → #1143)
2026-09-02
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 19.6pts (11.8 → 31.4)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 25 spots (#1276 → #1301)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 79 spots (#1196 → #1275)
2026-08-08
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1196
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 30.7 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/logoloom.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/logoloom)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/logoloom"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/logoloom.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 v4.4 · Raw JSON