Trust & Traffic Transparency
Every number on this page comes from our production database. No vanity metrics, no cherry-picked screenshots. Here's what's in the catalog, how people use it, and which AI systems and crawlers actually read it.
The catalog
All-time totals across every listed MCP server.
How people use it
All-time engagement, summed across every listing page.
Tool Introspection & Sandbox Verification
How we inspect, parse, and verify executable tool schemas across the directory.
tools/list protocol handshakes against hosted endpoints.Catalog Quality Spectrum & Ecosystem Signals
Deterministic quality tiering (0–100) and repository health signals across all active listings.
Traffic over the last 30 days
Total requests to our API vs. the subset that came from a named AI assistant or AI crawler. Hover or focus the chart for exact daily numbers.
- AI assistants
- Total requests
Share of AI Traffic
Market share among AI assistants and LLM crawlers hit over the last 30 days (5,616 total requests).
- ClaudeBot (Anthropic crawler)91.0% of AI traffic5.1K
- Claude / Anthropic8.7% of AI traffic487
- ChatGPT / OpenAI0.3% of AI traffic16
- Perplexity AI<0.1% of AI traffic3
Who's reading the API
125,354 requests from 150 countries in the last 30 days.
Every request to our search, listing, and llms.txt endpoints gets classified server-side from its User-Agent. “AI assistants” only counts named systems. Generic crawlers and unclassified agents are counted separately, so the two numbers never get blended into one.
- AI assistants: 5,616 (4.5%)
- Other crawlers & bots: 91,131 (72.7%)
- Human browsers: 28,571 (22.8%)
- Unclassified: 36 (<0.1%)
AI assistants & their crawlers
5,616 hits · 4.5% of trafficChat and agent traffic from Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Cursor, Copilot, and Windsurf, plus the crawlers those companies run to index content, like ClaudeBot and GPTBot.
- ClaudeBot (Anthropic crawler)5,110 · 4.1%
- Claude / Anthropic487 · 0.4%
- ChatGPT / OpenAI16 · <0.1%
- Perplexity AI3 · <0.1%
Other crawlers & bots
91,131 hits · 72.7% of trafficGeneral-purpose web crawlers, link-preview bots, and unnamed automated clients. Not AI systems, but still worth counting.
- Meta / Facebook bot34,128 · 27.2%
- Custom agents25,426 · 20.3%
- Other bots & crawlers24,598 · 19.6%
- Amazonbot6,978 · 5.6%
- CCBot (Common Crawl)1 · <0.1%
Human visitors (browser requests to the API)
28,571 hits · 22.8% of trafficBrowsers hitting API endpoints directly, separate from normal page views.
- Browser (Human)28,571 · 22.8%
Unclassified
36 hits · <0.1% of trafficRequests with no recognizable User-Agent pattern.
- Unknown36 · <0.1%
What's being requested
API surfaces hit in the last 30 days, most-used first.
- Markdown view95.9K
- Search API25.9K
- MCP tool calls2.0K
- Server detail API871
- llms.txt568
- llms-full.txt84
Where requests come from
Top request-origin countries in the last 30 days.
- United States82.3K
- Russia9.5K
- Canada6.9K
- Brazil2.4K
- France1.3K
- Netherlands1.2K
- Argentina1.1K
- Germany1.0K
Why we're open about this
No login gate, no filtering. This is the same dashboard our team looks at.
Our robots.txt allows GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, Amazonbot, and Bytespider to read the catalog, search API, and llms-full.txt.
We set ai-input=yes so answer engines and assistants can quote us directly.
We set ai-train=no. The catalog is available to read, not to train on.
See it yourself: robots.txt and llms-full.txt.