Sentry MCP
Agentic tooling for Sentry
Is Sentry MCP safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare Sentry MCP
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: Sentry MCP scores 67.3/100 (Grade B), ranked #423 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 4.9/10; 91% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (@sentry/mcp-server); last pushed 2026-10-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How Sentry 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.
- Publish build provenance for its packagesnpm publish --provenance from CI +14.4 → 81.7 A · #49 of 781
- Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 4.9 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Dangerous-Workflow 0, Signed-Releases 0 +8.5 → 75.8 B · #129 of 781
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Sentry 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.
-
Source Signed
github.com/getsentry/toolkit, NOASSERTION, last pushed 2026-10-10. 91% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.
-
Review and release Mixed
OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 4.9/10 (scanned Oct 2, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review1
- Branch Protection3
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow0
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies6
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 8Branch-Protection 3CI-Tests 10CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 1Contributors 10Dangerous-Workflow 0Dependency-Update-Tool 10Fuzzing 10License 9Maintained 10Packaging -1Pinned-Dependencies 6SAST 9Security-Policy 10Signed-Releases 0Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 0 -
Published packages Not linked
- npm @sentry/mcp-server Source link points to getsentry/sentry-mcp, same owner No build attestation
Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.
-
What you install today No known advisories
Latest release checked: @sentry/mcp-server 0.42.0. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-11).
Changes to this chain
No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Sentry MCP.
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 Sentry 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.
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 Sentry MCP compares in MCP Servers
- #247 Korean Law MCP 67.4 +0.1
- #248 Wet MCP 67.3 ±0
- #249 Sentry MCP 67.3 this agent
- #250 Apache Pinot MCP Server 67.2 −0.1
- #251 World Model MCP 67.2 −0.1
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Sentry MCP’s 67.3.
Where the 67.3 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
67.3 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceSentry MCP MCP Servers average (781 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 B 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 →
Rank Trend
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
78.1 / 100Common questions about Sentry MCP
Does Sentry MCP publish package provenance?
Does Sentry MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is Sentry MCP actively maintained?
What license does Sentry MCP use?
Are Sentry MCP'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 →
- code
- MCP signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Maintain Sentry MCP?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores Sentry 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.
Reputation Timeline
Signal history
Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →
For maintainers
[](https://hvtracker.net/agents/sentry-mcp)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/sentry-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/sentry-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in MCP Servers
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 v4.4 · Raw JSON