modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

The official C# SDK for Model Context Protocol servers and clients. Maintained in collaboration with Microsoft.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 61/100

External PR Merge Rate: 70%

Response Time: 18h

First Timer Success: 46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk has a recorded first-timer success rate of 45.8%. Repositories ranked A typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

Maintainers in modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 17.8 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 61.1 C-Rankâ„¢ score (A Tier) represent?

The C-Rank™ system evaluates GitHub projects on a 0–100 scale using real data: PR merge rates, review turnaround time, active maintainer presence, and first-time contributor success. A score of 61.1 places modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk is 70.1%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk?

modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk currently has 7 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

modelcontextprotocol
modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdkA•Welcoming4.5k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
modelcontextprotocol

modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk

4,487
A•Welcoming(61/100)C#

The official C# SDK for Model Context Protocol servers and clients. Maintained in collaboration with Microsoft.

Compare•
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Strict Architecture Gatekeeper

Warmth Score
7.1/10
Patience Score
7.8/10
Nitpick Rate
40%

Strict review standards in modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk. Ensure PR scope matches issue requirements closely before requesting review.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Ensure code complies with the project coding style
  • •Keep PRs scoped to a single concern
  • •Include context and link to the related issue

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit PRs without linking an issue
  • •Do not break existing tests without fixing them
  • •Do not mix unrelated refactors in a single PR
Response Velocity
17 hours
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.

Merge Efficiency
70.1%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
45.8%
Accepts new contributor PRs

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
39 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
70.1%
Merge Gauge
45.8%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe58/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.

GetMerged C-Rank badge for modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

Describe the bug Several OAuth tests occasionally fail on the windows-latest legs of Build and Test. If that occurs, the GetAuthServerMetadataAsync method gets a TaskCancelledException during a slow TLS handshake using the in-memory duplex pipe, ClientOAuthProvider wraps that into the "Failed to find .well-known/..." message, and assertion expectations about that message fail on the injected text – that is, the error manifests itself as a confusing assertion failure instead of a timeout. It appears to be similar to #1701 from the OAuth side of things. #1702 increased the server/discover probe timeout in the in-memory tests, but the OAuth metadata path has a similar timeout which was not added and is still failing after that merge. Tests affected so far: OAuth.AuthTests.CannotAuthenticate_WithInvalidClientMetadataDocument OAuth.DcrFailureTests.DcrRejection_PropagatesToConsumer_WithStatusBodyAndSentParameters ClientConformanceTests.RunConformanceTest(scenario: "auth/offline-access-sco

📅 Opened Aug 9, 2026💬 3 comments
Quality: 50/100Contribute

@modelcontextprotocol/inspector successfully connected to the server but tool call failed as the request timed out. It's a simple Echo tool. There is no log both in the application and the @modelcontextprotocol/inspector Log tab. The MCP server is ASP.Net Core 10 deployed and run on local k8s. When I try from Postman, connection is successful but there is no tool found on the server.

📅 Opened Aug 3, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 50/100Contribute

How to perform E2E integration tests for MCP server with streaming HTTP transport like what's done for the MVC? Any doc / blog on that?

📅 Opened Aug 2, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 45/100Contribute

Describe the bug Registering a handler of the notifications/tools/list_changed method (both via the McpClientOptions.Handlers.NotificationHandlers and via the McpSession.RegisterNotificationHandler(...) method) on a client that is connected to a server over Streamable HTTP works only for ca. 2-3 minutes after creation. If no notification is sent by the server for a longer time, the handler is no longer invoked. The problem does not happen while a debugger is attached. I have validated that the notifications continue to be received by the MCP Inspector, when it is connected at the same time as my client. I assume that an HTTP connection is being dropped somewhere along the way, but I haven't found the root cause yet. Steps To Reproduce Set up an ASP.NET MCP Server as shown in the samples. Have the server send sporadic notifications/tools/list_changed to all connected clients. Connect an MCP Client via Streamable HTTP as shown in the samples. Launch both applications without a debugger

📅 Opened Feb 3, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 30/100Contribute

Describe the bug I have created an MCP server and I am trying to use it in visual studio 2026 with github copilot. I created an .mcp.json for the solution and I managed to authenticate using oauth using the codelens ui for that file. When saving the .mcp.json file Visual Studio supplies the bearer token to the MCP server and it is marked as online. But when copilot chat tries to access it, the bearer token is not included in the request. But the server still shows connected in the config. I don't know if this is a problem with this library or not. If I execute the tools using the bearer token and postman it all works. But github copilot does not try to supply the token. Do I need to add anything special in the way of attributes or such to get copilot ai to understand it needs to supply the bearer token when calling tools? To Reproduce Authenticate the mcp server Try to use the tool in the chat. No token gets send. Expected behavior copilot chat should send the bearer token to the mcp

📅 Opened Jan 19, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 70/100Contribute
Looking for more C# beginner tasks?Explore C# GFI

Contributor Community Vibe Feedback

Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.

Have you contributed to this repo?

Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.

3 ratings required
Maintainer helpfulness
Review speed
Beginner friendliness

Contributor Compatibility & Review Speed Analysis for modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk

When evaluating whether to contribute to modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk, response velocity and maintainer engagement are crucial. GetMerged continuously tracks pull request trajectories, first-comment latency, and code review rounds to help developers avoid submitting pull requests to backlogged repositories.

Currently, maintainers of modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 17 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 70.1% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk

01

Is modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk has a recorded first-timer success rate of 45.8%. Repositories ranked Welcoming typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

02

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

The initial maintainer response time averages ~17 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 61.1 C-Rankâ„¢ score represent?

The C-Rankâ„¢ index scores repositories on a 0 to 100 scale using an objective formula: external PR merge rates, initial response speed, active maintainer count, and first-time contributor retention. A score of 61.1 places modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk?

The external pull request merge rate is 70.1%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.

05

Are there beginner Good First Issues open in modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk?

Yes, modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk currently has 7 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.

GetMerged C-Rankâ„¢ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk are automatically retrieved via the public GitHub API and recalculated daily. Insider pull requests submitted by repository owners or organization members are excluded from merge rate calculations to preserve objective external contributor statistics.