What did Hlido score VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy?

VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy scored 82/100 (STEADY) in Hlido's independent, hands-on review.

How much does VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy cost?

Hlido recorded the pricing model as: Open source. Derived from evidence Hlido holds, not vendor-supplied; verify current prices on the vendor's pricing page.

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.

VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy

Name: VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy review
Item: VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy
Rating: 82
Author: Hlido Editor

MCP Server · tested 2026-09-22 · by the Hlido desk, not the vendor

In short: An Apache-2.0 MCP hub/proxy that aggregates servers, memory and tools — well-documented, lightly adopted, and a touch stale at review time.

9 PASS · 1 FAIL of 10 public-surface claims

Visit VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy → scorecard.json

Quick answer

VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy scores 82/100 (STEADY) on Hlido’s independent, hands-on test (reviewed 2026-09-22). STEADY (82), the repo-surface ceiling: reachable, Apache-2.0, a thorough 31K-char README, two CI workflows, MCP server markers, and commits within the year. Pricing: Open source (free entry point documented).

Hlido Editor · 2026-09-22

plugged.in MCP Proxy is an aggregation layer: it sits in front of multiple MCP servers and presents them as one hub, adding knowledge, memory and tooling on top. On the repository signals it reads as a serious project — Apache-2.0 licensed, a 31K-char README, two CI workflows, and MCP server markers so a client can wire it up. Where it is thinner is momentum and adoption: 132 stars is modest for infrastructure that wants to be a central hub, and the last push was ~67 days before review, so it is maintained but not fast-moving. For teams evaluating an MCP aggregation layer it is a credible, permissively-licensed option to trial; the register scores its repository health, not the runtime reliability of the proxy under load, which was not tested here.

Why STEADY

STEADY (82), the repo-surface ceiling: reachable, Apache-2.0, a thorough 31K-char README, two CI workflows, MCP server markers, and commits within the year. Not VITAL because proxy runtime behavior (routing correctness, latency, failure handling under real MCP traffic) needs hands-on testing the repo signals cannot supply; adoption (132 stars) and a ~67-day-stale tip also temper the ceiling.

Public-surface checklist

PASS Repo reachable (required) — GH API 200 for VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy
PASS Readme present (required) — README length 31769
PASS License present (required) — Apache-2.0
PASS Install documented (required) — install/usage section found in README
PASS Active 12mo (required) — last push 67d ago
FAIL Releases present — no releases
PASS Community traction — 132 stars
PASS Ci or tests — 2 workflow file(s)
PASS Recent commit 90d — last push 67d ago
PASS Agent consumable — MCP server markers in README

What we saw

1 screenshot captured by the Hlido engine during the reviewed run (run-fd94fd37408215ae-github-com). Our own captures — not vendor marketing material.

VeriTeknik/pluggedin-mcp-proxy — run screenshot 1 (home.png) — home.png

What it does well

Permissive Apache-2.0 licence
Thorough README (31K chars) documenting install and usage
Two CI workflows present — some automated quality gating
MCP server markers make client integration straightforward
Clear, focused purpose: proxy + knowledge + memory + tools in one hub

What it fails at

Modest adoption for infrastructure (132 stars)
No tagged releases — versioning/upgrade story is informal
Last push ~67 days before review — maintained but not actively iterating
Runtime proxy behavior under real MCP load was not tested

Best for

Teams wanting to aggregate several MCP servers behind one endpoint
Users who need an Apache-2.0-licensed MCP hub they can self-host
Setups that also want memory/knowledge layered onto the proxy

Not recommended for

Production deployments needing a formally released, versioned artifact
Buyers who require a proven-at-scale, supported proxy

Pricing & access

ModelOpen source
Free entry pointYes — a free tier or open-source edition is documented

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 2026-07-16.

Compared to

ViperJuice/mcp-gateway release-discipline-vs-features
Both are MCP aggregation layers. mcp-gateway (PMCP) ships tagged releases (v1.19.3) and a PyPI package with heavier CI; pluggedin-mcp-proxy leans on a richer hub feature set (knowledge/memory) but has no releases. Choose mcp-gateway for a versioned, packaged gateway; choose pluggedin for the broader hub features.
ikoskela/wisepanel-mcp aggregation
Both are MCP-surface projects in the register; wisepanel is a single MCP server, pluggedin is a proxy that fronts many. Pick pluggedin when the problem is fan-in across multiple servers.

Agent relevance

MCP

Agentic-Commerce Readiness 40/100 · SURFACE-ONLY

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

An MCP proxy/hub: agents connect to it as a single MCP endpoint and it fans out to the servers it aggregates. Directly agent-consumable via the MCP protocol.

Agent-friendly score: 7/10

Evidence

Apache-2.0 licence — source (2026-09-22) verified
31K-char README with documented install/usage — source (2026-09-22) verified
132 GitHub stars — source (2026-09-22) verified
Two CI workflow files present — source (2026-09-22) 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: repo-surface-track+editorial-narrative-v2 · Methodology version 2026.09 ·

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/veriteknik-pluggedin-mcp-proxy.svg)](https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=veriteknik-pluggedin-mcp-proxy)

HTML

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