updated 2026-08-06 05:30 UTC

n8n-MCP

czlonkowski/n8n-mcp

A MCP for Claude Desktop / Claude Code / Windsurf / Cursor to build n8n workflows for you

Protocols & Tool Integration TypeScript Grade C Listed MIT
61.2/100
Rank #200 of 468
Compare n8n-MCP

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

Pick any agent to compare →

Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

Open compare tool Suggest correction
Listing state
Listed
Evidence coverage
Grade C · 2/5 signals
Last push
2026-08-04 · 2d ago
Recent change
No recent signal change

Is n8n-MCP safe? n8n-MCP scores 61.2/100 (Grade C), ranked #200 of 468 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 5.5/10; 69% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-04. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Protocols & Tool Integration

#18 Serena — 64.0 (C) → #19 Model Context Protocol / MCP — 61.7 (C) → #21 mcp-use — 61.1 (C) → #22 MCP Go — 59.0 (C) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-07-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#172 → #184)
2026-07-14
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#150 → #161)
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 20 spots (#130 → #150)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.5/10. 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 n8n-MCP View Protocols & Tool Integration Report missing data
84.0
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#20
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 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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-08-06 05:30 UTC · Repo last pushed 2 days ago

Rank Trend

2026-07-05 2026-08-06

Activity & Reach

Stars
22.6k
Forks
3.6k
Last Push
2026-08-04
2 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
20
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
20
Rank Change
▲1
was #201

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Protocols & Tool Integration

61.2 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

n8n-MCP Protocols & Tool Integration average (35 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
10.3 / 25
1.2 below avg 11.5
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
1.2 below avg 12.0
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.2 / 17
in line with avg 12.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
17.1 / 20
1.8 above avg 15.3
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
10.5 / 20
0.8 below avg 11.3

Activity Inputs

84.0 / 100
StarsRepository reach
26.1 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
16.5 / 25
CommunityFork signal
16.5 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
5.5 / 10
OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 5, 2026
Signed Commits
69%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts 10
Branch-Protection 5
CI-Tests 10
CII-Best-Practices 0
Code-Review 0
Contributors 6
Dangerous-Workflow 10
Dependency-Update-Tool 10
Fuzzing 0
License 10
Maintained 10
Packaging 10
Pinned-Dependencies 2
SAST 9
Security-Policy 10
Signed-Releases 0
Token-Permissions 0
Vulnerabilities 0

Is n8n-MCP safe?

n8n-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 n8n-MCP publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for n8n-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 n8n-MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
n8n-MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.5/10. 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 n8n-MCP actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).
What license does n8n-MCP use?
n8n-MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are n8n-MCP's commits signed?
69% of the last 100 commits to n8n-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
n8n-MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
2 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
  • code
  • search
  • shell
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 n8n-MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores n8n-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 5Grade 2Listed 1HVTrust 1Scorecard 1
2026-07-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#172 → #184)
2026-07-14
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#150 → #161)
2026-07-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 20 spots (#130 → #150)
2026-06-25
Grade Changed
Trust grade C → B
2026-06-22
Scorecard Added
OSSF Scorecard: 6.0/10
2026-06-22
Grade Changed
Trust grade D → C
2026-06-22
Rank Moved
Rank rose 127 spots (#256 → #129)
2026-06-22
HVTrust Changed
HVTrust up 38.0pts (25.6 → 63.6)
2026-06-21
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 16 spots (#240 → #256)
2026-06-20
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #240
GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 61.2 Grade C
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/n8n-mcp.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/n8n-mcp)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/n8n-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/n8n-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Protocols & Tool Integration

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.2 · Raw JSON