Quick Prompt Co.

Our Verification Methodology

Last updated: October 22, 2026

Every tool, MCP server, or CLI we cover on Quick Prompt Co. goes through the same four checks before it earns a spot in a guide. We don’t rank by star count alone — a popular repo can still be abandoned, and a small official one can be the safer pick.

1. Star count (context, not a verdict)

We record the current GitHub star count as a popularity signal, but stars only tell you what was true when people found the project — not whether it’s still maintained today.

2. Most recent commit / release

We check the actual commit history and release tags, not just the “updated” timestamp. A repo with a commit last week is treated differently from one whose last real change was over a year ago, even if both still show up in search results.

3. Issue handling

We look at whether open issues are actually being triaged and closed, or piling up unanswered. A growing backlog of unaddressed bug reports is a maintenance red flag even on an active-looking repo.

4. Does the practical claim still hold?

If a tool advertises something specific — “free,” “read-only by default,” “no API key required” — we verify that claim against the current version before repeating it in a guide.

5. We install it and run it ourselves

Reading the docs is where we start, not where we stop. Before a setup guide goes up, we install the tool on our own test machine (a Windows 11 laptop with Node 24 and Claude Code) using a fresh, empty Claude Code configuration, so nothing from our own setup leaks into the result. We copy the terminal output into the guide as it came out, including the errors and the workarounds we needed.

Some posts carry a Measured by us box. Everything in it comes from our own run: what we ran it on, the date, the numbers we got, and what the measurement does not cover. When we estimate something (for example, tokens from text size), the box says so. We don’t round numbers up, and we don’t publish a number we didn’t get ourselves.

If we couldn’t run something, because it needs an account we don’t have or hardware we don’t own, we say that in the guide and stick to what the official source states. In October 2026 we took a post offline because it was written from a README before we had run the tool, and we folded several short cheat sheets into longer guides instead of keeping thin pages around. Old URLs redirect to the page that replaced them.

Here’s what that looks like in practice, pulled directly from our own research notes:

$ checking obsidian-mcp (most-starred community server)
✗ last commit >1 year ago — excluded
$ checking mem0 official mcp server
✗ repository archived — excluded
$ checking modelcontextprotocol/server-postgres (Anthropic reference)
✗ archived + known read-only bypass vulnerability — excluded
$ checking redis/mcp-redis (official)
✓ active, vendor-maintained — included
$ checking supabase-community/supabase-mcp (official)
✓ ~2.6k stars, active development — included

When a popular project fails these checks, we say so in the guide instead of quietly leaving it out — that’s the point of publishing this page.

Recent exclusions: Obsidian MCP (most-starred fork, stale >1 year), Mem0’s official MCP server (archived, vendor moved to a plugin model), the archived Anthropic reference SQLite and Postgres servers (unmaintained, and the Postgres one has a documented read-only bypass), and Firecrawl MCP (excluded from our roundup pending primary-source confirmation of an unverified CVE claim found during research).

Guides also carry a “Last Verified” or “Updated” line showing when we last re-checked the install commands and maintenance status against live sources. If a project’s status changes materially after publication, we update the guide rather than leave stale information live.