What Is Anthropic’s New MCP Registry? A Guide for Developers & Enterprises

Understanding Anthropic’s New MCP Registry

The release of the MCP Registry by Anthropic has sparked a wave of attention, but also a fair bit of confusion. What is it? Does it replace existing registries like Smithery, Mastra, Glama.ai, or MCP.so? Does it hold code the way npm or PyPI do? Or is it something else entirely?

This post clarifies what the MCP Registry is, what it is not, and how to think about its role in the broader ecosystem.

Will Existing MCP Registries Get Eliminated?

The short answer is no.

The MCP Registry is the official upstream directory, aka the canonical feed of MCP servers. But it is intentionally minimal. It does not provide polished search, categories, or browsing UIs. Existing registries like Smithery, Mastra, Glama.ai, and MCP.so still serve a purpose: they provide user-facing discovery, curated listings, and integration flows.

The best analogy here is DNS:

• DNS has a root authority that maintains verified namespaces.
• But DNS root servers don’t provide a user-facing “domain browser.” That job is left to registrars and directory services.
• Likewise, the MCP Registry anchors namespaces and IDs, while user-facing registries can continue to build on top of it, syncing entries and adding their own experience.

So the official registry is not a replacement; rather, it’s more of a foundational backbone. 

What the MCP Registry Holds (and Doesn’t Hold)

One of the most important clarifications: the MCP Registry does not hold code.

Instead, it holds metadata about MCP servers. Two major cases exist:

1. Remote/live MCP servers
   These are services permanently deployed somewhere on the network. For example, Slack could run an MCP server at https://slack.com/mcp/sse. In such cases, the registry entry simply provides connection information (e.g. SSE/HTTP URL). Clients connect directly. No execution hints are needed.
   
2. Local or installable MCP servers
   These are distributed as code and run on the client’s machine. For instance, an npm package might expose itself as an MCP server when launched. In these cases, the registry entry provides execution hints: which package to install, what command to run, and how to start the process. The client uses these hints to spin up the server locally.

This distinction is not obvious at first glance, because in conventional networking, a “server” is always remote. MCP reuses the term differently: a “server” is any process that implements the protocol, whether it runs in a data center or on your laptop. This originates from the protocol’s early reliance on stdio transport, where a “server” was literally a subprocess spawned by the client. That history explains why execution hints exist: they are instructions for clients on how to start servers that don’t already exist as live services.

Namespaces and UUIDs: How MCP Identity Works

Namespaces First: The DNS Analogy

Just like DNS, the MCP Registry uses namespaces as the human-readable identity and provenance signal.

• Names follow a reverse-DNS pattern: com.slack/calendar, io.github.user/tool.
• Namespaces are authenticated:
  
  • For com.example/*, you must prove you control example.com (via DNS or HTTP challenge).
  • For io.github.*, ownership is tied to your GitHub account or organization.

This authentication step is critical. Without it, impersonation and typosquatting would be trivial.  So, for example, anyone could publish com.slackk/mcp-server and pretend to be Slack. By tying namespaces to domains or GitHub orgs, the registry enforces provenance and reduces the risk of malicious entries.

In this sense, namespaces behave like DNS names: they are what humans see, and they are what signal trust.

UUIDs as Durable Identifiers: MCP’s Extra Layer

Where MCP differs from DNS is that each registry entry also has a UUID (id).

• The UUID is an opaque, stable handle assigned when the entry is created.
• It never changes, even if the server’s metadata or name is updated.
• Clients can safely cache and reference the UUID as the durable pointer.
  

This extra layer exists because, unlike DNS where names are permanent and globally unique, software ecosystems often deal with renames, rebrands, or project reorganizations. The UUID ensures that even if the human-facing name changes, the underlying server identity remains stable.

• Multiple entries in one namespace: Each distinct server (com.example/tool1, com.example/tool2) gets its own UUID.
• Updates don’t change UUIDs: For a given server, metadata updates remain tied to the same UUID.

So: the namespace provides provenance (who owns this server), while the UUID provides durability (a permanent reference for clients).

Why the DNS Analogy Fits the MCP Registry

While Anthropic hasn’t explicitly branded the MCP Registry as “DNS for servers,” the parallels are striking:

• Root authority: Verifies namespaces and enforces uniqueness.
• Separation of roles: Provides canonical metadata but leaves user-facing search, browsing, and categorization to others.
• Backbone, not frontend: Just as DNS root servers don’t offer a UI, the MCP Registry isn’t designed as a discovery portal.

The analogy is helpful because it clarifies why the registry exists: not to replace existing registries, but to anchor them in a shared, authoritative source.

Enterprise Mirrors and Private Governance

The registry is also designed to be mirrored. Enterprises can pull the canonical feed, apply allow/deny lists, and host an internal catalog that reflects company policy. This mirrors how organizations often run internal DNS resolvers or private package repositories: the official service provides consistency, but governance and filtering happen locally.

How the MCP Registry Impacts the Ecosystem

So does Anthropic’s announcement kill off Smithery, Mastra, Glama.ai, or MCP.so? Not yet—and perhaps not at all.

Here are three plausible future scenarios:

1. Anthropic keeps the registry minimal.
   Existing registries continue to thrive as discovery and UX layers, adding value with search, curation, and integrations.
   
2. Anthropic adds a publisher dashboard.
   If Anthropic builds a polished interface for managing and browsing entries, registries will need to differentiate further—perhaps through community features or enterprise extensions.
   
3. Enterprises fork private mirrors.
   Organizations may stand up private registries anchored to the root but governed internally, leading to a split between public and private directories.

In all scenarios, the official registry acts as the root of trust, not the entire ecosystem.

Key Takeaways About the MCP Registry

If you only skimmed the announcement, you might assume Anthropic’s registry is a replacement for existing MCP registries, or another package repository like Maven or npm. In reality:

• It doesn’t eliminate existing registries - they can sync from the root and continue serving users with search, browsing, and curation.
• It doesn’t hold code - it holds metadata: connection info for live servers, execution hints for local ones.
• It clarifies identity - servers are identified by stable UUIDs, with provenance established via authenticated namespaces.
• It functions like DNS - authoritative backbone, not a user-facing product.
  

The MCP Registry is best understood as infrastructure. It sets the foundation for a consistent ecosystem of MCP servers, while leaving room for registries and platforms to innovate on top.

Looking Ahead: Open Questions for the MCP Ecosystem

Several aspects remain open:

• Will the official registry stay minimal, or add a user-facing dashboard?
• How will moderation, takedowns, and namespace disputes be handled?
• Will enterprise/private mirrors federate smoothly with the root, or diverge into separate ecosystems?

The answers will shape the MCP landscape in the next year. For now, though, the registry is best seen as a stabilizing backbone. It represents a step that makes MCP discovery more consistent, without upending the registries already serving developers today.

Gentoro: Direct Integration With Registry-Compliant Services

At Gentoro, we support bringing MCP Tools into our platform so developers can create more complex MCP Tools that compose around third-party MCP servers. With the arrival of the official MCP Registry, we can now support direct integration with any registry-compliant service, making it even more convenient to connect to MCP servers. 

In addition, we plan to add the ability to take a Gentoro-generated MCP Server and publish to any compliant registry, extending flexibility for developers who want to reach both public directories and private enterprise mirrors.

Curious to know more? Check out the Gentoro Playground! 

‍