updated 2026-10-09 08:15 UTC

Model Context Protocol / MCP

Repository Website by modelcontextprotocol

Model Context Protocol Servers

Protocols & Tool Integration TypeScript Listed NOASSERTION

Is Model Context Protocol / MCP safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 6.4 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 73%
Last push 2d ago
Compare Model Context Protocol / MCP

How does it stack up against its Protocols & Tool Integration neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: Model Context Protocol / MCP scores 62.5/100 (Grade C), ranked #586 of 1371 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 6.4/10; 73% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-10-07. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Model Context Protocol / 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 Model Context Protocol / MCP 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.

  1. Source Partly signed

    github.com/modelcontextprotocol/servers, NOASSERTION, last pushed 2026-10-07. 73% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 6.4/10 (scanned Sep 28, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review9
    • Branch Protection6
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions0
    • Pinned Dependencies2
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 10
    Branch-Protection 6
    CI-Tests 10
    CII-Best-Practices 0
    Code-Review 9
    Contributors 10
    Dangerous-Workflow 10
    Dependency-Update-Tool 10
    Fuzzing 0
    License 9
    Maintained 10
    Packaging 10
    Pinned-Dependencies 2
    SAST 0
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 0
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages None

    No registry package. Model Context Protocol / MCP is used from its repository, so what you run is whatever you check out: pin a release tag or commit.

Changes to this chain

No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Model Context Protocol / MCP.

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

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

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Model Context Protocol / 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 Model Context Protocol / MCP compares in Protocols & Tool Integration

  1. #34 CodeGraph 63.5 +1.0
  2. #35 Jarvis Registry 63.1 +0.6
  3. #36 Model Context Protocol / MCP 62.5 this agent
  4. #37 MCP Java SDK 62.2 −0.3
  5. #38 MCP C# SDK 61.3 −1.2

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Model Context Protocol / MCP’s 62.5.

Where the 62.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Protocols & Tool Integration average

62.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Model Context Protocol / MCP Protocols & Tool Integration average (62 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
11.6 / 25
0.7 above avg 10.9
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
1.0 below avg 11.8
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.9 / 17
0.9 above avg 13.0
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
13.6 / 20
in line with avg 13.9
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
11.9 / 20
0.8 above avg 11.1

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#562 → #575)
2026-10-04
Rank Moved
Rank rose 34 spots (#596 → #562)
2026-10-04
Activity Score Changed
Activity score up 7pts (77 → 84)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 6.4/10. 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.
Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Model Context Protocol / MCP View Protocols & Tool Integration Report missing data
84.1
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#36
In Protocols & Tool Integration

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 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 2026-10-09 08:15 UTC · Repo last pushed 2 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-09

Activity & Reach

Stars
91.1k
Forks
11.8k
Last Push
2026-10-07
2 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
6?
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
3
Open Issues
202
Rank Change
▲2
was #588

Analysis

Activity Inputs

84.1 / 100
StarsRepository reach
29.8 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
10.5 / 25
CommunityFork signal
18.9 / 20

Common questions about Model Context Protocol / MCP

Model Context Protocol / MCP has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.
Does Model Context Protocol / MCP publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Model Context Protocol / 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 Model Context Protocol / MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Model Context Protocol / MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.4/10. 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 Model Context Protocol / MCP actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).
What license does Model Context Protocol / MCP use?
Model Context Protocol / MCP ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Model Context Protocol / MCP's commits signed?
73% of the last 100 commits to Model Context Protocol / 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
high confidence
Implemented
Model Context Protocol / MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
low confidence
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
1 tags
Broad capability areas detected.
  • code
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
N/A
No package source configured
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
  • MCP signal live
  • External deps live
  • Tool / plugin surface live
  • Package provenance drift live

Maintain Model Context Protocol / MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Model Context Protocol / 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 29Grade 2Score 2HVTrust 1
2026-10-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#562 → #575)
2026-10-04
Rank Moved
Rank rose 34 spots (#596 → #562)
2026-10-04
Activity Score Changed
Activity score up 7pts (77 → 84)
2026-10-03
Grade Changed
Trust grade B → C
2026-10-03
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 120 spots (#476 → #596)
2026-10-03
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust down 3.4pts (65.1 → 61.7)
2026-10-03
Activity Score Changed
Activity score down 9pts (86 → 77)
2026-10-02
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 32 spots (#444 → #476)
2026-09-27
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 19 spots (#411 → #430)
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 221 spots (#176 → #397)
2026-09-21
Rank Moved
Rank rose 268 spots (#441 → #173)
2026-09-17
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#420 → #431)
2026-09-11
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#388 → #401)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 25 spots (#348 → #373)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 67 spots (#273 → #340)
2026-09-03
Grade Changed
Trust grade C → B
2026-09-03
Rank Moved
Rank rose 57 spots (#324 → #267)
2026-09-01
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#310 → #320)
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 25 spots (#285 → #310)
2026-08-30
Rank Moved
Rank rose 14 spots (#299 → #285)
2026-08-26
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 22 spots (#268 → #290)
2026-08-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 18 spots (#247 → #265)
2026-08-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 13 spots (#261 → #248)
2026-08-19
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#248 → #264)
2026-08-17
Rank Moved
Rank rose 11 spots (#261 → #250)
2026-08-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 18 spots (#231 → #249)
2026-08-12
Rank Moved
Rank rose 14 spots (#245 → #231)
2026-08-08
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 45 spots (#183 → #228)
2026-08-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#186 → #196)
2026-07-29
Rank Moved
Rank rose 10 spots (#199 → #189)
2026-07-28
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#189 → #199)
2026-07-26
Rank Moved
Rank rose 14 spots (#202 → #188)
2026-07-14
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#165 → #177)
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 23 spots (#142 → #165)
GitHub → Website →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 62.5 Grade C
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/model-context-protocol-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/model-context-protocol-mcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/model-context-protocol-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/model-context-protocol-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Protocols & Tool Integration

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