Miro
MCP server for controlling Miro whiteboards with AI assistants
Is Miro safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare Miro
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: Miro scores 55.9/100 (Grade C), ranked #824 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 5.8/10; 46% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-11-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How Miro 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 5.8 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Code-Review 0, Contributors 0 +6.7 → 62.6 C · #342 of 778
- Sign every commit46% signed today +2.6 → 58.5 C · #401 of 778
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Miro 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 Partly signed
github.com/olgasafonova/miro-mcp-server, MIT, last pushed 2026-11-09. 46% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.
-
Review and release Mixed
OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 5.8/10 (scanned Nov 9, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review0
- Branch Protection3
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies7
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 10Branch-Protection 3CI-Tests 10CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 0Contributors 0Dangerous-Workflow 10Dependency-Update-Tool 10Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 10Packaging 10Pinned-Dependencies 7SAST 0Security-Policy 10Signed-Releases 0Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 10 -
Published packages None
Distributed as the container image ghcr.io/olgasafonova/miro-mcp-server:1.22.0; HVTracker doesn't check that registry's source link yet.
Changes to this chain
- 2026-08-30 OSSF Scorecard: 5.5/10
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 Miro’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 Miro compares in MCP Servers
- #449 FreeCAD MCP 56.0 +0.1
- #450 Bagel 55.9 ±0
- #451 Miro 55.9 this agent
- #452 Starwind UI MCP 55.8 −0.1
- #453 MCP Sap Docs 55.8 −0.1
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Miro’s 55.9.
Where the 55.9 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
55.9 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceMiro 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
57.4 / 100Common questions about Miro
Does Miro publish package provenance?
Does Miro have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is Miro actively maintained?
What license does Miro use?
Are Miro'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 Miro'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 Miro?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores Miro 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/miro)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/miro"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/miro.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