- Reliability 2/20
- Only the manifest and README were supplied; no source, tests, or CI workflow for mcp/packages/interior was provided. The manifest is self-consistent and the README advertises 7 tools, but the MCP initialization handshake, tool behavior, and error handling cannot be verified. Per static calibration, missing execution evidence requires a conservative score.
- Security and permissions 2/20
- No implementation code is available to inspect credential handling, network boundaries, or side effects, and no data-flow disclosure exists. No red-line violation is visible, but least privilege, external network usage, and confirmation of dangerous operations cannot be assessed, so the score is minimal.
- Maintenance 3/20
- Only repo-level metadata (not archived, Apache-2.0) is visible; there is no release history, commit activity, issue response, or dependency-update evidence specific to this server. README badges are untrusted, and sibling servers' maintenance activity cannot be attributed to this one.
- Documentation 2/20
- The only server-specific documentation is a one-line table row and the manifest description. There are no tool parameters, authentication notes, limits, cost information, or troubleshooting guidance for the interior server. Documentation for sibling servers in the repository cannot be counted here.
- Setup experience 4/20
- The manifest provides an npm package identifier and stdio transport, and the README gives `npx interior-design-3d-mcp`, making a one-line install plausible. However, there is no client configuration example, no prerequisites, and no verifiable execution evidence; the static calibration also caps setup at 15, so the score is 4.