Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 15:17 UTC

activecampaign / postmark-mcp

Official Postmark MCP server by ActiveCampaign — 24 tools to send, template, search, and diagnose transactional email from Claude, Cursor & other AI assistants.

JavaScriptMIT★ 47 stars⑂ 15 forkssince Jun 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindMCP serverLibraryhow this is determined
#email#email-sender#mcp#postmark#activecampaign#ai#claude#model-context-protocol

activecampaign/postmark-mcp holds a health index of 51 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (73/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (27/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

51
overall / 100
Moderate

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

51
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ActiveCampaignOrganization
76 followers88 public repossince Jan 2011

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npm@activecampaign/postmark-mcp2.1.13,12223 days agopostmarkactivecampaignemailmcpmodel-context-protocolclaudecursorai

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

73Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

55Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume — 14 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year8

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 4 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~13.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv2.1.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases13.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

48Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

39Weak
How it's scored
27/60Stars — 47 stars
9.6/25Forks — 15 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks15
stars47
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

58Moderate
How it's scored
46.6/80Monthly downloads — 3,122 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@activecampaign/postmark-mcp
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads3,122
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

57Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

29At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 61% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.607

Issue & PR responsiveness

34At Risk
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
22/30PR acceptance — 11/15 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs11
open_issues20
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

86Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
13.6/25Owner reach — 76 followers of ActiveCampaign
25/25Track record — 88 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers76
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginActiveCampaign
public_repos88
account_age_days5,663
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

92Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 3 days ago
12/20Version history — 2 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@activecampaign/postmark-mcp
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

27At Risk · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

1Critical
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://postmarkapp.com/lp/mcp
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsemail, email-sender, mcp, postmark, activecampaign, ai, claude, model-context-protocol
has_wikino
homepagehttps://postmarkapp.com/lp/mcp
docs_sitehttps://postmarkapp.com/lp/mcp
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

48Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

48Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained — 4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

40Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes8,468
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

14Critical
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

47Weak
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
47.1/55Manageable file sizes — 1/7 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes72,294
source_files_sampled7
oversized_source_files1

Machine-readable interfaces

33At Risk
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

47GitHub stars
4contributors
14commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
4releases
1bus factor
20open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-07-17 15:17 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
1Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 9/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk1.29.0package.json
npmdotenv16.6.1package.json
npmzod3.25.76package.json
All dependencies 92

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 89 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@modelcontextprotocol/sdk1.29.0direct
npmdotenv16.6.1direct
npmzod3.25.76direct
npm@hono/node-server1.19.14indirect
npmaccepts2.0.0indirect
npmajv8.18.0indirect
npmajv-formats3.0.1indirect
npmbody-parser2.2.2indirect
npmbytes3.1.2indirect
npmcall-bind-apply-helpers1.0.2indirect
npmcall-bound1.0.4indirect
npmcontent-disposition1.0.1indirect
npmcontent-type1.0.5indirect
npmcookie0.7.2indirect
npmcookie-signature1.2.2indirect
npmcors2.8.6indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdepd2.0.0indirect
npmdunder-proto1.0.1indirect
npmee-first1.1.1indirect
npmencodeurl2.0.0indirect
npmes-define-property1.0.1indirect
npmes-errors1.3.0indirect
npmes-object-atoms1.1.1indirect
npmescape-html1.0.3indirect
npmetag1.8.1indirect
npmeventsource3.0.7indirect
npmeventsource-parser3.0.6indirect
npmexpress5.2.1indirect
npmexpress-rate-limit8.5.2indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-uri3.1.2indirect
npmfinalhandler2.1.1indirect
npmforwarded0.2.0indirect
npmfresh2.0.0indirect
npmfunction-bind1.1.2indirect
npmget-intrinsic1.3.0indirect
npmget-proto1.0.1indirect
npmgopd1.2.0indirect
npmhas-symbols1.1.0indirect
npmhasown2.0.2indirect
npmhono4.12.25indirect
npmhttp-errors2.0.1indirect
npmiconv-lite0.7.2indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmip-address10.2.0indirect
npmipaddr.js1.9.1indirect
npmis-promise4.0.0indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmjose6.2.1indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse1.0.0indirect
npmjson-schema-typed8.0.2indirect
npmmath-intrinsics1.1.0indirect
npmmedia-typer1.1.0indirect
npmmerge-descriptors2.0.0indirect
npmmime-db1.54.0indirect
npmmime-types3.0.2indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnegotiator1.0.0indirect
npmobject-assign4.1.1indirect
npmobject-inspect1.13.4indirect
npmon-finished2.4.1indirect
npmonce1.4.0indirect
npmparseurl1.3.3indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmpath-to-regexp8.4.2indirect
npmpkce-challenge5.0.1indirect
npmproxy-addr2.0.7indirect
npmqs6.15.2indirect
npmrange-parser1.2.1indirect
npmraw-body3.0.2indirect
npmrequire-from-string2.0.2indirect
npmrouter2.2.0indirect
npmsafer-buffer2.1.2indirect
npmsend1.2.1indirect
npmserve-static2.2.1indirect
npmsetprototypeof1.2.0indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmside-channel1.1.0indirect
npmside-channel-list1.0.0indirect
npmside-channel-map1.0.1indirect
npmside-channel-weakmap1.0.2indirect
npmstatuses2.0.2indirect
npmtoidentifier1.0.1indirect
npmtype-is2.0.1indirect
npmunpipe1.0.0indirect
npmvary1.1.2indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmwrappy1.0.2indirect
npmzod-to-json-schema3.25.1indirect
Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with activecampaign/postmark-mcp. Read them side by side →

99IBM/mcp-context-forgeAn AI Gateway, registry, and proxy that sits in front of any MCP, A2A, or REST/gRPC APIs, exposing a unified endpoint with centralized discovery, guardrails and management. Optimizes Agent & Tool calling, and supports plugins.Exceptional98awslabs/cli-agent-orchestratorMulti-agent orchestration for AI coding CLIs — Claude Code, Kiro, Codex, and more, coordinated in isolated tmux sessionsExceptional98langchain-ai/langchainjsThe agent engineering platformExceptional97langgenius/difyBuild Agentic workflows, RAG pipelines, with rich AI model and tool support on one collaborative workspace. Deploy on cloud, VPC, or self-hosted, so teams move from prototype to production without rebuilding the stack.Exceptional96yamadashy/repomix📦 Repomix is a powerful tool that packs your entire repository into a single, AI-friendly file. Perfect for when you need to feed your codebase to Large Language Models (LLMs) or other AI tools like Claude, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Perplexity, Gemini, Gemma, Llama, Grok, and more.Exceptional96vercel/aiThe AI Toolkit for TypeScript. From the creators of Next.js, the AI SDK is a free open-source library for building AI-powered applications and agents Exceptional

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — npm.