MCP.Market

Is RE-call MCP Memory Server MCP server safe?

Yes, with the usual care.

B72/100grade B

Safe to use. Minor gaps such as a missing repository or slower maintenance.

No critical or high findings in the latest scan.

How RE-call MCP Memory Server compares

Against every graded Databases MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.

Safety score
72/100
higher than 30% of 802 Databases servers
Tools that change things
22%
typical: 10%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break

What its tools let an agent do: 18 read · 5 change

Release history: 2 versions in the registry since 2026-09-09, latest 2026-09-25, typically one every 16 days.

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-10-15 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

1 medium
  • Code scan222 source files scanned20/25
  • –Live reliabilityno gateway calls yet and no remote to proben/a
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (local package is not executed); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualitystatic API keys via environment variables6/15
  • Maintenancelast push 0 days ago15/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner6/10

Findings (1)

  • mediumeval / new Function usedexec.eval
    x/recall/sparse.py: …m_pretrained(model_name, **loader_args).eval() # `from_pretrained` loads to …
Overall 72/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

Other servers that do what RE-call MCP Memory Server does

  • Run402
    x402 pay-per-call infra for agents: $0.03 image generation, Postgres, auth, storage, functions.
    B
  • Memory Vault
    Local-first AI memory layer with hybrid search. Postgres + pgvector. Self-hosted, MIT.
    B
  • CogniCore
    Memory, reflection and safety for AI agents. Hosted or local, no vector database.
    A

RE-call MCP Memory Server reviews, tools and install