MCP Victorialogs
The implementation of Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for VictoriaLogs.
Is MCP Victorialogs safe? Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.
Compare MCP Victorialogs
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
- Google Health Fitbit MCP +0.2 higher
- Kolada MCP Server same score
- Power Automate MCP Server by Flow Studio same score
In detail: MCP Victorialogs scores 43.6/100 (Grade D), ranked #1093 of 1325 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 3.1/10; 99% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-07-15. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How MCP Victorialogs compares in MCP Servers
- #639 Google Health Fitbit MCP 43.8 +0.2
- #640 Kolada MCP Server 43.6 ±0
- #641 MCP Victorialogs 43.6 this agent
- #642 Power Automate MCP Server by Flow Studio 43.6 ±0
- #643 Seo Crawler MCP 43.5 −0.1
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks MCP Victorialogs’s 43.6.
Where the 43.6 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
43.6 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceMCP Victorialogs 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 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 →
Rank Trend
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
33.9 / 100Supply Chain Trust
Common questions about MCP Victorialogs
Does MCP Victorialogs publish package provenance?
Does MCP Victorialogs have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is MCP Victorialogs actively maintained?
What license does MCP Victorialogs use?
Are MCP Victorialogs'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 Victorialogs'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 Victorialogs?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores MCP Victorialogs 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-victorialogs)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-victorialogs"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-victorialogs.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in MCP Servers
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON