MCP Uptime Kuma
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for Uptime Kuma version 2.
Is MCP Uptime Kuma safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare MCP Uptime Kuma
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: MCP Uptime Kuma scores 65.1/100 (Grade B), ranked #473 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 6.7/10; 70% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-09-13. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How MCP Uptime Kuma compares in MCP Servers
- #270 Obsidian MCP Server 65.3 +0.2
- #271 Korea Stock MCP 65.3 +0.2
- #272 MCP Uptime Kuma 65.1 this agent
- #273 SigNoz MCP Server 65.1 ±0
- #274 PageIndex MCP 65.1 ±0
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks MCP Uptime Kuma’s 65.1.
Where the 65.1 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
65.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceMCP Uptime Kuma 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
52.3 / 100Supply Chain Trust
Common questions about MCP Uptime Kuma
Does MCP Uptime Kuma publish package provenance?
Does MCP Uptime Kuma have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is MCP Uptime Kuma actively maintained?
What license does MCP Uptime Kuma use?
Are MCP Uptime Kuma'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 →
- MCP signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Detected changes to MCP Uptime Kuma'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 Uptime Kuma?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores MCP Uptime Kuma 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-uptime-kuma)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-uptime-kuma"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-uptime-kuma.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