Glama vs Official MCP Registry
Product engineer: Use Glama grades as a hint, since the page does not explain the method. Developer-platform lead: The registry is the neutral source; Glama adds opinion. Agent builder: Neither confirms a server works today; connect and list tools. Glama grades servers A to F for licence, quality and maintenance; the official registry records only active or deprecated status.
The sourced difference
Glama grades servers A to F for licence, quality and maintenance; the official registry records only active or deprecated status. (Glama: Glama MCP servers directory, observed on 4 November 2026; Official MCP Registry: Official MCP Registry API, GET /v0/servers, observed on 4 November 2026)
Verdicts by reader
| Reader | Verdict |
|---|---|
| Product engineer | Use Glama grades as a hint, since the page does not explain the method. |
| Developer-platform lead | The registry is the neutral source; Glama adds opinion. |
| Agent builder | Neither confirms a server works today; connect and list tools. |
Side by side on the rubric
| Dimension | Glama | Official MCP Registry |
|---|---|---|
| Remote transport | lists both | records both |
| OAuth with client registration | filter only | not applicable |
| Per-tool auth scoping | not documented | not applicable |
| Hosting and scale limits | not published | not a host |
| Observability | health status on listings | not applicable |
| Pricing | not detailed | free |
| Registry submission | open, Add Server button | CLI with namespace verification |
| Discoverability by agents | API with key and attribution | open paginated API |
| Own server in the registries | not found | not applicable |
Evidence for every cell is on the profiles: Glama and Official MCP Registry.