90-100 Strong
Listing metadata and evidence are complete enough for high-confidence evaluation.
Methodology
Wardn Score Methodology
Wardn Score is a 0-100 quality signal for published MCP server listings. It summarizes available registry, source, package, documentation, maintenance, ownership, and security evidence so users can compare servers before reading upstream documentation.
Evidence sources
Scores are based on metadata available to Wardn Hub at review time. A report can come from scorer-collected evidence or from a Hub fallback when full scorer evidence is not yet available.
| Area | What Wardn checks |
|---|---|
| Schema completeness | Required server metadata, package targets, remotes, capabilities, and version fields. |
| Documentation | Installation steps, configuration notes, examples, supported transports, and troubleshooting. |
| Source review | Reachable source repository, reviewable README, package files, lockfiles, and workflow evidence. |
| Target metadata | Package registry identifiers, versions, transport commands, remote URLs, and endpoint metadata. |
| Maintenance and security | Recent update signals, license metadata, owner verification, secret handling, and security evidence. |
Score bands
Wardn Score is a comparison aid, not a guarantee that a server is safe, official, or suitable for production. Always verify upstream source and permissions before use.
70-89 Good
Most important metadata is present, with some evidence or documentation gaps remaining.
40-69 Limited
Useful registry metadata exists, but reviewers should expect missing setup or trust evidence.
0-39 Weak
Critical metadata, source, package, documentation, or security evidence is missing.