MCP Accessibility Scanner
An MCP (Model Context Protocol) server for performing accessibility audits on webpages using axe-core.
Is MCP Accessibility Scanner safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare MCP Accessibility Scanner
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: MCP Accessibility Scanner scores 68.5/100 (Grade B), ranked #365 of 1325 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 6.0/10; 66% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-09-26. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How MCP Accessibility Scanner compares in MCP Servers
- #219 Webhook MCP Server 68.6 +0.1
- #220 Keboola MCP Server 68.5 ±0
- #221 MCP Accessibility Scanner 68.5 this agent
- #222 MCP Atlassian 68.5 ±0
- #223 Figma Ui MCP 68.5 ±0
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks MCP Accessibility Scanner’s 68.5.
Where the 68.5 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
68.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceMCP Accessibility Scanner MCP Servers average (775 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 B 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
66.1 / 100Supply Chain Trust
Common questions about MCP Accessibility Scanner
Does MCP Accessibility Scanner publish package provenance?
Does MCP Accessibility Scanner have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is MCP Accessibility Scanner actively maintained?
What license does MCP Accessibility Scanner use?
Are MCP Accessibility Scanner'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 →
- browser
- MCP signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Detected changes to MCP Accessibility Scanner'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 MCP Accessibility Scanner?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores MCP Accessibility Scanner 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/mcp-accessibility-scanner)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-accessibility-scanner"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-accessibility-scanner.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in MCP Servers
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON