MCP Go

A Go implementation of the Model Context Protocol (MCP), enabling seamless integration between LLM applications and exte

Protocols & Tool Integration Go Grade C Listed MIT
59.0/100
Rank #228 of 468
Compare MCP Go

How does it stack up against its Protocols & Tool Integration neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

Open compare tool Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
Evidence coverage
Grade C · 2/5 signals
Last push
2026-07-29 · 8d ago
Recent change
No recent signal change

Is MCP Go safe? MCP Go scores 59.0/100 (Grade C), ranked #228 of 468 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 4.7/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-07-29. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Protocols & Tool Integration

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-07-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#218 → #228)
2026-07-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 27 spots (#243 → #216)
2026-07-22
Activity Score Changed
Activity score up 5pts (70 → 75)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 4.7/10. 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.
76.7
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#22

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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-08-06 05:00 UTC · Repo last pushed 8 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-07-05 2026-08-06

Activity & Reach

Stars
9.0k
Forks
862
Last Push
2026-07-29
8 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
16?
Downloads (7d)
HN mentions (30d)
Open Issues
13
Rank Change
=
was #228

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Protocols & Tool Integration

59.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

MCP Go Protocols & Tool Integration average (35 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
10.9 / 25
0.6 below avg 11.5
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
1.2 below avg 12.0
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
12.5 / 17
in line with avg 12.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
13.9 / 20
1.4 below avg 15.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
9.5 / 20
1.8 below avg 11.3

Activity Inputs

76.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
23.7 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
23.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
15.3 / 25
CommunityFork signal
13.7 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
4.7 / 10
OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 5, 2026
Signed Commits
100%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts 10
Branch-Protection 0
CI-Tests 10
CII-Best-Practices 0
Code-Review 8
Contributors 10
Dangerous-Workflow 10
Dependency-Update-Tool 0
Fuzzing 0
License 10
Maintained 10
Packaging -1
Pinned-Dependencies 0
SAST 0
Security-Policy 10
Signed-Releases -1
Token-Permissions 0
Vulnerabilities 0

Is MCP Go safe?

MCP Go 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 Go publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for MCP Go. 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 Go have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
MCP Go has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 4.7/10. 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 Go actively maintained?
Maintained. Last push was 8 days ago.
What license does MCP Go use?
MCP Go ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are MCP Go's commits signed?
100% of the last 100 commits to MCP Go 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 Go appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency detected.
Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
  • code
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

Maintain MCP Go?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores MCP Go 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 10Listed 1HVTrust 1Grade 1Scorecard 1Score 1
2026-07-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#218 → #228)
2026-07-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 27 spots (#243 → #216)
2026-07-22
Activity Score Changed
Activity score up 5pts (70 → 75)
2026-07-15
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#216 → #227)
2026-07-14
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#202 → #216)
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 25 spots (#177 → #202)
2026-07-08
Rank Moved
Rank rose 11 spots (#189 → #178)
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 24 spots (#176 → #200)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#165 → #176)
2026-06-22
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 4.5/10
2026-06-22
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → C
2026-06-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 102 spots (#267 → #165)
2026-06-22
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 33.0pts (23.6 → 56.6)
2026-06-21
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#250 → #267)
2026-06-20
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #250

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 59.0 Grade C
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-go.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-go)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-go"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-go.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Protocols & Tool Integration

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 v4.2 · Raw JSON