Is Scrivener MCP safe to use?

Scrivener MCP has an HVTrust score of 52.8/100 (Grade C), ranked #433 of 1283 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Scrivener MCP?

Scrivener MCP scores 52.8/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 43 GitHub stars and is categorized under MCP Servers.

Scrivener MCP

writerslogic/scrivener-mcp

The definitive MCP server for Scrivener — connect your novels, screenplays, and manuscripts to Claude, ChatGPT, and any

MCP Servers TypeScript Grade C Listed AGPL-3.0

52.8/100

Rank #433 of 1283

Compare Scrivener MCP

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

Open compare tool Suggest correction

Listing state

Listed

Evidence coverage

Grade C · 2/5 signals

Last push

2026-08-10 · 2d ago

Recent change

Rank +1

Is Scrivener MCP safe? Scrivener MCP scores 52.8/100 (Grade C), ranked #433 of 1283 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage C (2 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: its packages ship with cryptographic provenance; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 7.7/10; 11% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in MCP Servers

#144 AirMCP — 53.2 (C) → #145 SearXNG HTTP MCP — 53.0 (C) → #147 MCP Sap Gui — 52.1 (C) → #148 Gnosis MCP — 51.5 (C) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Increase the share of verified signed commits for clearer maintainer identity.

Recent Changes

2026-08-10

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 16 spots (#417 → #433)

2026-08-08

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #414

Maintainer Checklist

Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.

Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Scrivener MCP View MCP Servers Report missing data

61.5

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#146

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 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

2026-08-11 2026-08-12

Activity & Reach

Stars

Forks

Last Push

2026-08-10

2 days ago

Commits (4 wk)

Downloads (7d)

—

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

Rank Change

was #433

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs MCP Servers

52.8 / 100 · 67.0% confidence

Scrivener MCP MCP Servers average (761 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

17.7 / 25

12.7 above avg 5.0

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

18.0 / 18

4.7 above avg 13.3

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

15.0 / 17

6.2 above avg 8.8

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

18.6 / 20

6.2 above avg 12.4

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

3.9 / 20

1.9 below avg 5.8

Activity Inputs

61.5 / 100

StarsRepository reach

9.9 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

24.7 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

21.2 / 25

CommunityFork signal

5.5 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

Verified

npm attestation

OSSF Scorecard

7.7 / 10

OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 8, 2026

Signed Commits

11%

of last 100 commits verified

Code-Review 0

Binary-Artifacts 10

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Pinned-Dependencies 10

Security-Policy 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 10

Maintained 10

Token-Permissions 10

Vulnerabilities 10

CII-Best-Practices 5

Signed-Releases -1

Fuzzing 0

Packaging 10

SAST 7

CI-Tests 5

Branch-Protection 3

License 10

Contributors 6

Is Scrivener MCP safe?

Public trust evidence for Scrivener 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 Scrivener MCP publish package provenance?

Yes. Scrivener MCP's package releases carry build provenance attestations, which cryptographically link the published package back to its source repository and CI workflow.

Does Scrivener MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Scrivener MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 7.7/10. 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 Scrivener MCP actively maintained?

Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).

What license does Scrivener MCP use?

Scrivener MCP ships under AGPL-3.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Scrivener MCP's commits signed?

11% of the last 100 commits to Scrivener 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

Scrivener MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

high confidence

3 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.

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

Maintain Scrivener MCP?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Scrivener 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

2026-08-10

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 16 spots (#417 → #433)

2026-08-08

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #414

GitHub → npm: scrivener-mcp

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

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

Other agents in MCP Servers

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON