Is MCP File Tools safe to use?

MCP File Tools has an HVTrust score of 60.8/100 (Grade C), ranked #673 of 1374 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for MCP File Tools?

MCP File Tools scores 60.8/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 30 GitHub stars and is categorized under MCP Servers.

MCP File Tools

Repository

MCP server for file operations on non-UTF-8 text: detects the encoding from the bytes, hands the model UTF-8, and writes back in the original encoding with BOM and CRLF/LF intact. 24 encodings — Cyrillic/CP1251, CP1252, KOI8, ISO-8859, UTF-16, GBK/GB18030.

MCP Servers Go Listed GPL-3.0

Is MCP File Tools safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 8.3 / 10

Provenance None

Signed commits 12%

Last push 3d ago

Compare MCP File Tools

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Suggest a correction

In detail: MCP File Tools scores 60.8/100 (Grade C), ranked #673 of 1374 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 8.3/10; 12% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-11-07. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How MCP File Tools 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.

Sign every commit12% signed today +4.4 → 65.2 B · #302 of 778
Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 8.3 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Code-Review 0, Contributors 0 +1.4 → 62.2 C · #351 of 778

Already done? Suggest a correction Add the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships MCP File Tools 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.

Source Partly signed

github.com/dimitar-grigorov/mcp-file-tools, GPL-3.0, last pushed 2026-11-07. 12% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.
Review and release Strong

OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 8.3/10 (scanned Nov 8, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review0
- Branch Protection3
- Signed Releases10
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions10
- Pinned Dependencies10
All 18 Scorecard checks

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 10

License 10

Maintained 10

Packaging 10

Pinned-Dependencies 10

SAST 10

Security-Policy 10

Signed-Releases 10

Token-Permissions 10

Vulnerabilities 10
Published packages None

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

Changes to this chain

2026-08-28 OSSF Scorecard: 7.7/10

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 MCP File Tools’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 MCP File Tools compares in MCP Servers

#366 MCP ZAP Server 60.9 +0.1
#367 Webhook MCP Server 60.9 +0.1
#368 MCP File Tools 60.8 this agent
#369 Power BI Modeling MCP Server 60.8 ±0
#370 macOS Calendar and Reminders 60.7 −0.1

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks MCP File Tools’s 60.8.

Where the 60.8 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

60.8 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

MCP File Tools MCP Servers average (778 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

11.0 / 25

in line with avg 10.8

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

2.9 below avg 13.7

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

15.6 / 17

3.3 above avg 12.3

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

18.1 / 20

5.9 above avg 12.2

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

3.6 / 20

4.0 below avg 7.6

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.

Recent Changes

2026-11-07

Rank Moved

Rank rose 19 spots (#692 → #673)

2026-10-31

Rank Moved

Rank rose 30 spots (#703 → #673)

2026-10-28

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 51 spots (#652 → #703)

Maintainer Checklist

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.

Compare with another agent View MCP Servers Report missing data

58.1

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#368

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 C 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 →

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-11-10

Activity & Reach

Stars

Forks

Last Push

2026-11-07

3 days ago

Commits (4 wk)

Downloads (7d)

—

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

Rank Change

▼3

was #670

Analysis

Activity Inputs

58.1 / 100

StarsRepository reach

8.9 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

24.6 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

19.7 / 25

CommunityFork signal

4.8 / 20

Common questions about MCP File Tools

MCP File Tools has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.

Does MCP File Tools publish package provenance?

No published build provenance is currently detected for MCP File Tools. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.

Does MCP File Tools have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

MCP File Tools has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 8.3/10. 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 MCP File Tools actively maintained?

Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 3 day(s).

What license does MCP File Tools use?

MCP File Tools ships under GPL-3.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are MCP File Tools's commits signed?

12% of the last 100 commits to MCP File Tools 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

Implemented

MCP File Tools appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

medium confidence

1 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Anthropic

Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.

Tool / Plugin Surface

high 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 MCP File Tools'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 → implemented

Maintain MCP File Tools?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores MCP File Tools 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

2026-11-07

Rank Moved

Rank rose 19 spots (#692 → #673)

2026-10-31

Rank Moved

Rank rose 30 spots (#703 → #673)

2026-10-28

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 51 spots (#652 → #703)

2026-10-28

Activity Score Changed

Activity score down 5pts (60 → 55)

2026-10-24

Rank Moved

Rank rose 14 spots (#655 → #641)

2026-10-14

Rank Moved

Rank rose 11 spots (#663 → #652)

2026-10-12

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#647 → #660)

2026-10-10

Rank Moved

Rank rose 18 spots (#661 → #643)

2026-10-09

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 16 spots (#645 → #661)

2026-10-05

Rank Moved

Rank rose 13 spots (#657 → #644)

2026-10-02

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#631 → #643)

2026-09-28

Rank Moved

Rank rose 64 spots (#685 → #621)

2026-09-28

Activity Score Changed

Activity score up 6pts (53 → 60)

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 → implemented

2026-09-23

Grade Changed

Trust grade D → C

2026-09-23

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 291 spots (#389 → #680)

2026-09-23

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 10.4pts (47.6 → 58.0)

2026-09-22

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #389

2026-09-21

Removed From Active Tracking

Removed from active tracking

2026-09-19

Rank Moved

Rank rose 21 spots (#679 → #658)

2026-09-18

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 14 spots (#665 → #679)

2026-09-14

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 51 spots (#605 → #656)

2026-09-14

Activity Score Changed

Activity score down 5pts (59 → 54)

2026-09-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 32 spots (#573 → #605)

2026-09-11

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#560 → #573)

2026-09-10

Rank Moved

Rank rose 14 spots (#574 → #560)

2026-09-08

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#555 → #568)

2026-09-07

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 38 spots (#517 → #555)

2026-09-06

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 16 spots (#501 → #517)

2026-09-05

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 65 spots (#436 → #501)

2026-09-03

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 24 spots (#404 → #428)

2026-09-02

Rank Moved

Rank rose 11 spots (#415 → #404)

2026-09-01

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#405 → #415)

2026-08-31

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 38 spots (#367 → #405)

2026-08-28

Scorecard Added

OSSF Scorecard: 7.7/10

2026-08-28

Grade Changed

Trust grade D → C

2026-08-28

Rank Moved

Rank rose 663 spots (#1042 → #379)

2026-08-28

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 37.0pts (22.8 → 59.8)

2026-08-27

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 22 spots (#1020 → #1042)

2026-08-26

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 89 spots (#931 → #1020)

2026-08-17

Rank Moved

Rank rose 13 spots (#948 → #935)

2026-08-16

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 29 spots (#919 → #948)

2026-08-14

Rank Moved

Rank rose 17 spots (#937 → #920)

2026-08-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#925 → #937)

GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

Markdown:
            [![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-file-tools.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-file-tools)
            
HTML:
            <a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-file-tools"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-file-tools.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

MCP File Tools

How MCP File Tools could raise its score

Chain of custody

Source Partly signed

Review and release Strong

Published packages None

Changes to this chain

Evidence behind this score

Verify this score yourself

What this score doesn’t check

How MCP File Tools compares in MCP Servers

Where the 60.8 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

Quick Trust Read

Rank Trend

Activity & Reach

Analysis

Activity Inputs

Common questions about MCP File Tools

AI agent surface

Maintain MCP File Tools?

Reputation Timeline

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

Other agents in MCP Servers