Evaluation report

• Repository is reachable

  https://github.com/ssut/Remote-MCP @ 5f764b2 — ★ 208 · TypeScript · MIT · last push 1 year ago

• Manifest detected

  kind=mcp slug=remote-mcp-client · path=packages/client · source=package.json

• Slug is URL-safe

  "remote-mcp-client" matches /^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{0,62}$/

• Slug is unique within kind

  No collision found for mcp/remote-mcp-client

• Version is semver

  0.1.0

• Description qualitywarn

  Only 3 words · 29 chars — more detail helps discovery

  Tell consumers what this artifact does in a full sentence.

• README is present and substantial

  6,980 chars · 11 sections · 5 code blocks

• Tags / topics declared

  7 total — ai, claude, llm, mcp, mcp-client, mcp-server (+1)

• README has usage / example sections

  found: Getting Started

• Homepage / docs URL declared

  no homepage declared (registry will use the repo URL) — info-only, not blocking

• Dependencies: known vulnerabilities

  OSV.dev clean — 0 high/critical across 3 deps

• LICENSE file at repo root

  LICENSE

• No sensitive files in the repo

  scanned for .env, credentials.json, *.pem, .ssh/, AWS / GCP configs — none found

• MCP: SDK version pinnedwarn

  @modelcontextprotocol/sdk pinned at "latest" — drifts on every install

  Pin to a caret range (e.g. `^1.2.0`) or an exact version so consumers reproduce your tested build.

• MCP: launch path

  bin: @remote-mcp/client

• MCP: @modelcontextprotocol/sdk in dependencies

  pinned at "latest"

• MCP: ESM package

  "type": "module"

• MCP: server surface

  0 tools

• Recent activitywarn

  last push 1 year ago — looks slowing down

  Consumers prefer artifacts that are actively maintained (threshold: 90 days, configurable via EVAL_RECENCY_PASS_DAYS).

• Tests detectedwarn

  no test/tests/__tests__/spec/t/ dirs, no JVM src/test/, and no JS/TS/Python/Go/Ruby/Elixir test files

  Add tests (even a smoke test). Consumers gauge maintenance quality by their presence.

• CI configuration detected

  GitHub Actions (1 workflows)

This artifact hasn't produced behavioral results yet: the evaluation sandbox couldn't run it (it may need credentials we don't provide, or a build our environment doesn't support). That's a limitation of our environment, not a verdict on the artifact.