What did Hlido score Augments?

Augments scored 73/100 (STEADY) in Hlido's independent, hands-on review.

Does any vendor pay Hlido for placement?

No. Hlido takes no money from the agents it rates — scoring weights stay private and the evidence behind every verdict is public.

Augments

Name: Augments review
Item: Augments
Rating: 73
Author: Hlido Editor

Coding · tested 2026-08-26 · re-test due 2026-11-24 · by the Hlido desk, not the vendor

In short: A focused MCP server that hands Claude Code real type signatures, prose docs and working examples for any npm package — not a curated list — so the model stops guessing from stale training data.

4 PASS · 1 FAIL of 5 public-surface claims

Visit Augments → scorecard.json

Quick answer

Augments scores 73/100 (STEADY) on Hlido’s independent, hands-on test (reviewed 2026-08-26). STEADY (73) because Augments targets a real, specific agent failure mode (guessing npm APIs) with a genuinely agent-native, one-line MCP install and an 'any package, not a curated list' scope. Pricing was not findable on the public surface when tested.

Hlido Editor · 2026-08-26

Augments does one thing and states it plainly: it is an MCP server that gives Claude Code types, docs and examples pulled from npm for any package, not a hand-curated subset. The value proposition is sharp and real — coding agents routinely hallucinate APIs or lean on outdated training data, and a tool that injects current type signatures and working examples at the moment of use directly attacks that failure mode (the site frames it as a clean 'before: guesses / after: type signatures, prose docs, working examples'). Setup is a single line (`claude mcp add -s user augments -- npx -y @augmnt-sh/augments-mcp-server`), which is exactly the low-friction path an agent user wants. The reasons it sits mid-STEADY rather than higher: the reviewed public surface is a single landing page, so there is little evidence of depth — how many registries beyond npm, how it handles private packages, version pinning, or rate limits — and there is no visible license, adoption signal, or independent benchmark on the captured surface. It is a promising, well-scoped utility whose ceiling here is set by how little the public page lets us verify.

Why STEADY

STEADY (73) because Augments targets a real, specific agent failure mode (guessing npm APIs) with a genuinely agent-native, one-line MCP install and an 'any package, not a curated list' scope. Held at the lower end of STEADY because the public surface is a single page with limited evidence of depth, no visible license or adoption signal, and unverified handling of private packages, versioning and rate limits.

Public-surface checklist

PASS Homepage loads (required)
PASS Primary value prop (required) — Types, docs and examples from npm for any package, over MCP
PASS Cta present (required) — claude mcp add one-line install command
FAIL Pricing or access — No pricing or license surfaced on the captured page
PASS Evidence or demo — Before/after framing and install command; no live demo captured

What we saw

1 screenshot captured by the Hlido engine during the reviewed run (run-38a81c131ae220b6-augments-dev). Our own captures — not vendor marketing material.

Augments — run screenshot 1 (home.png) — home.png

What it does well

Precisely scoped: current type signatures, prose docs and working examples for any npm package, injected over MCP
Directly attacks a real agent failure — hallucinated or outdated API usage from stale training data
One-line install into Claude Code (`claude mcp add -s user augments ...`)
'Any package, not just a curated list' — no gatekept allowlist

What it fails at

Reviewed surface is a single landing page — little evidence of depth or edge-case handling
No visible license, GitHub star count, or independent adoption signal on the captured surface
Unclear handling of private packages, version pinning, monorepos and rate limits
Scope is npm-only on the evidence seen — no other registries or languages demonstrated

Best for

Claude Code users who want accurate, current npm type signatures and examples at generation time
JavaScript/TypeScript teams whose agents frequently misuse library APIs

Not recommended for

Teams needing multi-language/multi-registry documentation coverage beyond npm
Users who require a documented license, SLA, or proven handling of private-package auth

Pricing & access

Pricing findable on the public surfaceFAIL No pricing or license surfaced on the captured page (tested 2026-08-26)

Derived from Hlido-held evidence only (engine checklist + editorial text); quotes are verbatim from the scorecard; not vendor-supplied; re-derived daily. Verify current prices on the vendor's pricing page. Last verified 2026-08-26.

Compared to

Serena external-library-docs-vs-own-code-structure
Serena gives an agent structural/symbol context about your own codebase; Augments injects external npm package docs and type signatures. Complementary rather than competing — Serena for your code, Augments for the libraries it depends on.
Continue single-purpose-context-vs-full-assistant
Continue is a full open-source AI coding-assistant framework; Augments is a single-purpose MCP server feeding npm docs into an existing assistant. Continue for the whole assistant, Augments as a targeted context plug-in.

Agent relevance

MCP Behavioral-testable

Agentic-Commerce Readiness 57/100 · INTEGRABLE

Independent readiness for agent delegation & transaction. How it’s scored · check live

Installed as an MCP server into Claude Code with a single `claude mcp add` command; the agent then calls it to fetch current type signatures, docs and examples for any npm package at generation time, reducing hallucinated or outdated library usage. Single-purpose and low-friction, intended to sit alongside a coding agent rather than replace it.

Agent-friendly score: 8/10

Evidence

MCP server that gives Claude Code types, docs and examples from npm for any package — source (2026-08-26) verified
One-line install via claude mcp add — source (2026-08-26) verified
Positioned to replace guesses/stale training data with real type signatures and working examples — source (2026-08-26) verified

scorecard.json · transparency passport · registry · methodology

More: compare agents · best of · developer tools · incident registry

Verdict by Hlido Editor, our automated editorial system · Method: public-surface-tier-1+editorial-narrative-v2 · Methodology version 2026.05 · Next review due 2026-11-24

How this page was produced. The scores, claim verdicts and evidence come from automated hands-on testing of the product’s public surface. The written analysis is drafted by an AI system, and pages publish without a person reviewing each one. Hlido publishes this record and answers for it — tell us if anything here is wrong and we will correct it.

Embed this trust badge

Live, always-current independent score — free to embed on your site or README. No vendor pays for placement.

Markdown

[![Hlido trust score](https://hlido.eu/badge/augmnt-augments-mcp-server.svg)](https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=augmnt-augments-mcp-server)

HTML

<a href="https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=augmnt-augments-mcp-server"><img src="https://hlido.eu/badge/augmnt-augments-mcp-server.svg" alt="Hlido trust score"></a>