MCP Victoriametrics
Website
The implementation of Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for VictoriaMetrics
Is MCP Victoriametrics safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare MCP Victoriametrics
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: MCP Victoriametrics scores 57.2/100 (Grade C), ranked #788 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 3.9/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-11-08. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How MCP Victoriametrics 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.
- Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 3.9 to 9.0lowest checks: Binary-Artifacts 0, CII-Best-Practices 0, Fuzzing 0 +10.6 → 67.8 B · #252 of 778
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships MCP Victoriametrics 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 Signed
github.com/VictoriaMetrics/mcp-victoriametrics, Apache-2.0, last pushed 2026-11-08. 100% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.
-
Review and release Weak
OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 3.9/10 (scanned Oct 17, 2026, refresh pending). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Reviewn/a
- Branch Protection1
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies4
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 0Branch-Protection 1CI-Tests 7CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review -1Contributors 6Dangerous-Workflow 10Dependency-Update-Tool 10Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 10Packaging 10Pinned-Dependencies 4SAST 0Security-Policy 0Signed-Releases 0Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 0 -
Published packages None
Distributed as the container image ghcr.io/victoriametrics/mcp-victoriametrics:1.120.1; HVTracker doesn't check that registry's source link yet.
Changes to this chain
- 2026-08-30 OSSF Scorecard: 3.6/10
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 Victoriametrics’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.
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 Victoriametrics compares in MCP Servers
- #427 Runapi Ai MCP 57.2 ±0
- #428 Pyslang MCP 57.2 ±0
- #429 MCP Victoriametrics 57.2 this agent
- #430 Xdebug MCP 57.1 −0.1
- #431 Wavyrai reMarkable MCP Server 57.0 −0.2
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks MCP Victoriametrics’s 57.2.
Where the 57.2 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
57.2 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceMCP Victoriametrics MCP Servers average (778 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 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
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
65.8 / 100Common questions about MCP Victoriametrics
Does MCP Victoriametrics publish package provenance?
Does MCP Victoriametrics have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is MCP Victoriametrics actively maintained?
What license does MCP Victoriametrics use?
Are MCP Victoriametrics'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 Victoriametrics'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 Victoriametrics?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores MCP Victoriametrics 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-victoriametrics)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/mcp-victoriametrics"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/mcp-victoriametrics.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 v4.4 · Raw JSON