RegistryCompare › A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol vs mcpc

A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol vs mcpc

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol and mcpc, two Protocols & Tool Integration projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol leads on trust — 89.6/100 (Grade A) vs 81.3/100 (Grade A), a 8.3-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal A2A / Agent2Agent Protocolgoogle/A2A mcpcapify/mcpc
HVTrust score 89.6 81.3
Evidence grade A A
Coverage grade A B
Overall rank #15 #85
Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration #2 #5
GitHub stars 25.5k 756
Last updated 2d ago 4d ago
Build provenance Yes Yes
OSSF Scorecard 7.0 / 10 4.6 / 10
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Downloads 2.6M/wk 1k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 21.2 17.7
Identity & provenance / 18 18.0 18.0
Transparency / 17 14.4 12.4
Maintenance / 20 17.5 17.1
Adoption / 20 19.1 11.1
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented
External providers
Requires API keys No Yes
Plugin surface extensions
Provenance drift Unknown Match
Open in the live compare tool → A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol profile mcpc profile More Protocols & Tool Integration →

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption, scaled by an evidence-confidence factor. Grade bands: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Signals refresh daily. Full methodology v4.3 →