AGENT NATIVE OFFERS

← Leaderboard

MCPMarket Human-Dependent

AUDIE Score: 58/100 · Audited 2026-04-10 · Website: https://mcpmarket.com · Machine-readable: JSON

Pillar Scores

P1 Signal Architecture — 13/25
P2 Clarity Stack — 10/25
P3 Trust Envelope — 10/20
P4 Velocity Triggers — 10/10
P5 Gravity Design — 15/20

Criterion-level scores sum to 56; the published pillar totals (authoritative) sum to 58. Discrepancy traces to the original audit document and is preserved for transparency.

Audit History

Scores are never overwritten — every re-audit is appended as a new dated version. Machine-readable: history JSON.

VersionDateScoreTierRubric
v12026-04-1058/100Human-Dependentv1-2026-04

Executive Summary

MCPMarket lands in the **Human-Dependent** tier (58/100) — but the score is deceptive. It achieves a perfect Velocity score (10/10), the only platform audited to date to do so, because it requires zero friction for discovery and provides complete decision-making signals upfront. The structural moat is also real: strong network effects and deep integration gravity give MCPMarket lasting platform potential. The gap is almost entirely in Signal Architecture and Clarity — the platform that exists to help AI agents discover tools has no /llms.txt, no schema.org markup, and no programmatic API of its own. Publishing /llms.txt (30-minute fix) and adding SoftwareApplication schema markup would immediately lift the score by 9+ points. A lightweight directory API would push MCPMarket firmly into Agent-Ready territory and cement its position as the canonical MCP discovery layer for autonomous agents.

Strongest Signals

Critical Gaps

Priority Actions

  1. Publish /llms.txt immediately — +5 pts · P1 · Effort: Low
  2. Add schema.org/SoftwareApplication markup to all listings — +4 pts · P1 · Effort: Low
  3. Add an account system with saved servers and installation history — +4 pts · P5 · Effort: Med

All 20 Criteria

P1-A Structured Data — 2/5
No schema.org Offer, Product, or SoftwareApplication markup found on directory listing pages. Basic website metadata present but nothing structured for machine consumption.
P1-B Machine-Readable Pricing — 3/5
MCPMarket is a free directory; pricing is clearly "free" but this is communicated in prose only, not tagged or structured. Individual MCP server pricing (where applicable) is listed in HTML text.
P1-C llms.txt / Agent Layer — 1/5
No /llms.txt found. No agent identity document or agent-facing structured overview of the platform exists.
P1-D API / MCP Availability — 4/5
Platform exists specifically to catalog and distribute MCP servers; each listing provides installation commands and configuration snippets. No MCPMarket API for programmatic directory queries found, which limits score.
P1-E Discoverability (GEO) — 3/5
Site content is clear and well-structured for web indexing; MCP server descriptions include technical detail. Not yet optimized for AI retrieval specifically.
P2-A Offer Completeness — 3/5
Directory listings include server name, description, and install instructions but offer details (capabilities, limits, pricing) vary significantly by listing. Not machine-parseable from a single source.
P2-B Scope & Limits — 1/5
No rate limits, usage caps, or service boundaries documented at the platform level. Individual server limits depend entirely on the upstream provider; MCPMarket provides no aggregated limit data.
P2-C Substitution Rules — 1/5
No guidance on what happens when a listed MCP server is unavailable, deprecated, or removed. No fallback or substitution framework.
P2-D Conditional Logic — 2/5
Platform terms are minimal; conditions for listing availability, server uptime, and removal are not disclosed. Agents cannot anticipate condition changes.
P2-E Semantic Precision — 3/5
Server descriptions vary in quality by contributor; some are precise and technical, others are vague. No platform-enforced precision standard.
P3-A Verifiable Performance — 1/5
No uptime data, SLA, or third-party performance verification at the platform level. MCPMarket is a directory, not a host — but no verification of listed servers is provided either.
P3-B Scoped Permissions — 3/5
MCP protocol inherently supports scoped permissions per server; MCPMarket listings document required permissions for each server. Platform-level permission scoping not present.
P3-C Audit Trail — 2/5
No machine-accessible audit log or transaction history. GitHub links for open-source servers provide some version history, but this is not systematic.
P3-D Behavioral Consistency — 4/5
Platform appears stable; listings include version numbers and GitHub commit history. Open-source nature of most entries provides some behavioral consistency signal.
P4-A Friction-Free Activation — 5/5
Zero friction: no signup, no payment, no approval required. Agents (or developers) can discover, review, and install any MCP server directly from the listing. Pure discovery with no gate.
P4-B Agent Decision Signals — 5/5
Install commands are copy-paste ready; server capabilities and required permissions are listed upfront; GitHub stars and activity visible as quality signals. Agents have everything needed to evaluate without human input.
P5-A Integration Depth — 4/5
Once an MCP server is integrated into an agent's configuration, switching requires deliberate re-configuration. MCPMarket is the discovery layer; the installed server creates the actual switching cost. Network effects are strong.
P5-B Agent Memory Layer — 2/5
No account system, no saved favorites, no installation history tracked at the platform level. Agents must re-discover servers from scratch in each session.
P5-C Programmatic Renewal — 2/5
No renewal mechanism exists; MCPMarket is a directory, not a subscription. Updates to installed servers require manual re-discovery or direct GitHub monitoring.
P5-D Compounding Value — 5/5
[Capped at 5] Strong: more MCP servers listed → more agent use cases served → more developers publishing to MCPMarket → more agents adopting it as the canonical discovery layer. Network effects are real and accelerating.

Rubric: v1-2026-04. Scores reflect the company's state on the audit date and may have improved since.