YellowMCP
YellowMCP Research

The State of MCP Reliability

April 2026

The first independent assessment of reliability, security, and maintenance across the MCP server ecosystem

Executive Summary

20,348
Servers Indexed
2,181
Remote Endpoints
actively monitored
3,070,369
Health Checks
since April 1
83/100
Avg Trust Score

Key Findings

27% of remote MCP endpoints are dead. Out of 2,181 remote-capable servers, 582 fail to respond — timeout, connection refused, or not found.

298 servers (13.7%) have zero authentication. Any agent can connect and execute tools without credentials.

52% have open CORS (Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *), allowing cross-origin requests from any domain.

Finance scores lowest on trust despite handling the most sensitive data — a notable gap between risk and security posture.

Ecosystem Overview

YellowMCP indexes 20,348 MCP servers from the Official MCP Registry, Smithery, PulseMCP, mcpmonitoring.com, and community lists. Of these, 2,181 have remote endpoints that can be independently monitored.

Data Sources

mcpmonitoring
18,078
registry
1,607
smithery
422
awesome-list
125
pulsemcp
115
claimed
1

Category Distribution

dev-tools
14,662 servers
other
2,788 servers
data
1,199 servers
productivity
793 servers
media
465 servers
finance
227 servers
security
214 servers

Reliability Assessment

Server Status (2,181 remote endpoints)

573
Up (26.3%)
953
Reachable (43.7%)
73
Degraded (3.3%)
582
Down (26.7%)

30-Day Uptime Distribution

99%+ uptime
612
95-99%
208
90-95%
312
80-90%
260
Below 80%
789

Latency Distribution

<100ms
49
100-500ms
85
500-2000ms
1509
>2000ms
538

Top 10 Most Reliable Servers

#ServerCategoryUptimeLatencyTrust
1PostHog MCP Server32,537dev-tools99.8%535ms100
2edgar.tools SEC Intelligence1,990dev-tools99.2%541ms95
3Buildkite50dev-tools99.6%653ms95
4io.github.alphavantage/alpha_vantage_mcp119dev-tools99.9%635ms85
5ai.smithery/brave891dev-tools99.9%681ms95
6com.monday/monday.com394dev-tools99.7%657ms100
7ai.smithery/docfork-mcp459dev-tools99.8%695ms95
8Slack MCP Server21dev-tools99.7%591ms100
9Axiom11data99.4%684ms100
10com.stripe/mcp1,456finance99.2%799ms95

Security Intelligence

2,180 remote MCP servers scanned with 5 passive security checks: authentication, transport security, CORS policy, information leakage, and SSL/TLS certificate quality.

Trust Score Distribution

Excellent (90+)
1,195
Good (70-89)
483
Fair (50-69)
491
Poor/Critical (<50)
11

298 servers have zero authentication

13.7% of remote MCP servers respond with 2xx and no authentication required. Any agent can connect and execute tools without credentials. This is the #1 security concern in the ecosystem.

Authentication

OAuth/Bearer
661
Weak (static key)
179
No auth
298

SSL/TLS Certificates

Valid
2056
Expiring (<30d)
20
Invalid/Expired
4

Trust Score by Category

dev-tools
83.7/100
other
82.6/100
data
84/100
productivity
83.7/100
media
83.9/100
finance
78.9/100
security
80/100

Maintenance & Activity

40%
Committed in 30 days
731
Active in 90 days
60%
No commits in 30+ days

Of 1,206 remote servers with linked GitHub repositories, only 40% have committed code in the last 30 days. Abandoned MCP servers represent a growing reliability risk — they accumulate security vulnerabilities and drift from protocol updates.

Methodology

Health Monitoring

Every remote endpoint is checked via HTTP GET/SSE handshake every 5-15 minutes. We record status code, response latency, and error details. Servers are classified as up (2xx within 10s), degraded (slow or intermittent), reachable (401/403), or down (timeout/error).

Security Scanning

All checks are passive and non-intrusive. We assess authentication requirements, transport security (HTTPS), CORS headers, information leakage (server headers, error details), and SSL certificate validity. No penetration testing or active exploitation.

Trust Score

Starts at 100. Deductions: no authentication (-30), HTTP only (-25), invalid SSL (-20), expiring SSL (-10), weak auth (-10), error details exposed (-10), open CORS (-5), server headers exposed (-5), low uptime (-10 to -30). Range: 0-100.

Limitations

Uptime data reflects only the monitoring period (since April 1, 2026). Servers without remote endpoints cannot be health-checked. Security scans assess external posture only — internal architecture and code quality are not evaluated. Trust scores are not endorsements.

Recommendations

For developers choosing MCP servers

Check uptime history before depending on a server. Verify it requires authentication. Look at GitHub commit activity — a server with no commits in 90 days is a maintenance risk. Use YellowMCP's agent discovery tools to find reliable servers at runtime.

For MCP server operators

Claim your listing on YellowMCP to verify ownership. Add authentication — 13.8% of the ecosystem is wide open. Monitor your uptime and set up alerts. Embed a reliability badge in your README to signal quality.

For the ecosystem

The MCP ecosystem has a quality layer problem. Registries list servers but don't verify they work. Discovery tools don't assess security. The gap between “listed” and “production-ready” is where reliability intelligence fits.

Share this report

Stay updated on MCP reliability

Get the monthly State of MCP Reliability report and ecosystem insights.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.