updated 2026-10-16 16:07 UTC

Memory MCP

Repository

A scenario + entity memory MCP service that provides persistent memory capabilities for Claude Code.

MCP Servers Python Listed MIT

Is Memory MCP safe? Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

OSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 0%
Last push 82d ago
Advisories None known
Compare Memory MCP

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Memory MCP scores 43.5/100 (Grade D), ranked #1153 of 1378 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 3.3/10; recent commits are unsigned; no published advisory affects its latest release (chenxiaofie-memory-mcp); last pushed 2026-07-26. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Memory MCP 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.

Already done? Suggest a correctionAdd the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Memory MCP and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the package you install. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.

  1. Source Unsigned

    github.com/chenxiaofie/memory-mcp, MIT, last pushed 2026-07-26. None of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so no change traces to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Weak

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 3.3/10 (scanned Oct 11, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review0
    • Branch Protection0
    • Signed Releases0
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions9
    • Pinned Dependencies0
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 0
    CI-Tests -1
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 0
    Contributors 0
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 0
    Fuzzing 0
    License 10
    Maintained 2
    Packaging 10
    Pinned-Dependencies 0
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 0
    Signed-Releases 0
    Token-Permissions 9
    Vulnerabilities 1

  3. Published packages Linked, not attested

    Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.

  4. What you install today No known advisories

    Latest release checked: chenxiaofie-memory-mcp 0.3.3. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-16).

Changes to this chain

  • 2026-09-02 OSSF Scorecard: 3.4/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

  • GitHub repository data
  • Package downloads
  • Supply-chain checks
  • Public actions (missing)
  • Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Memory MCP’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 Memory MCP compares in MCP Servers

  1. #661 Strava MCP 43.7 +0.2
  2. #662 Adaptive Cards MCP 43.5 ±0
  3. #663 Memory MCP 43.5 this agent
  4. #664 Google Health Fitbit MCP 43.3 −0.2
  5. #665 Himalayas Remote Jobs 43.2 −0.3

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Memory MCP’s 43.5.

Where the 43.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

43.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Memory MCP MCP Servers average (781 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
4.1 / 25
6.4 below avg 10.5
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
2.7 below avg 13.5
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
11.3 / 17
1.0 below avg 12.3
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
6.5 / 20
5.8 below avg 12.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
4.8 / 20
2.6 below avg 7.4

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#1102 → #1116)
2026-10-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1094 → #1104)
2026-09-25
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1045 → #1055)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 3.3/10. 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.
Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
Refresh maintenance signals The repo was last pushed 82 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Memory MCP View MCP Servers Report missing data
22.0
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#663
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 D 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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-10-16 16:07 UTC · Repo last pushed 82 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-16

Activity & Reach

Stars
10
Forks
2
Last Push
2026-07-26
82 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
49
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
0
Rank Change
▼3
was #1150

Analysis

Activity Inputs

22.0 / 100
StarsRepository reach
6.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
13.6 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
2.2 / 20

Common questions about Memory MCP

Public trust evidence for Memory MCP is thin: several supply-chain signals are missing or weak. This does not mean the project is unsafe — it means an outside observer cannot easily verify the usual integrity checks. Treat with extra scrutiny.
Does Memory MCP publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Memory MCP. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Memory MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Memory MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 3.3/10. 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 Memory MCP actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 82 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does Memory MCP use?
Memory MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Memory MCP's commits signed?
0% of the last 100 commits to Memory MCP 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
Memory MCP 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
None detected
No clear plugin system or broad tool surface detected.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
high confidence
Match
Published package metadata matches the tracked repo
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 Memory MCP'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
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented

Maintain Memory MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Memory MCP 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
Rank 23Listed 2HVTrust 2Score 1Scorecard 1Delisted 1MCP 1
2026-10-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 14 spots (#1102 → #1116)
2026-10-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1094 → #1104)
2026-09-25
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#1045 → #1055)
2026-09-23
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank rose 158 spots (#1198 → #1040)
2026-09-23
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 26.6pts (19.1 → 45.7)
2026-09-22
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1198
2026-09-21
Removed From Active Tracking
Removed from active tracking
2026-09-12
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#1027 → #1038)
2026-09-11
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#1015 → #1027)
2026-09-09
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#1000 → #1015)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 33 spots (#958 → #991)
2026-09-06
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#943 → #958)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 66 spots (#877 → #943)
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 33 spots (#844 → #877)
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 50 spots (#794 → #844)
2026-09-02
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 3.4/10
2026-09-02
Rank Moved
Rank rose 351 spots (#1145 → #794)
2026-09-02
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 18.4pts (28.5 → 46.9)
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 43 spots (#1102 → #1145)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 29 spots (#1073 → #1102)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 54 spots (#1019 → #1073)
2026-08-29
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 51 spots (#968 → #1019)
2026-08-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 35 spots (#933 → #968)
2026-08-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 25 spots (#908 → #933)
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 115 spots (#793 → #908)
2026-08-25
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 21 spots (#772 → #793)
2026-08-25
Activity Score Changed
Activity score down 8pts (37 → 30)
2026-08-16
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#750 → #766)
2026-08-10
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 39 spots (#711 → #750)
2026-08-08
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #709
GitHub → PyPI: chenxiaofie-memory-mcp

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 43.5 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/memory-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/memory-mcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/memory-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/memory-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON