Registry › Compare › Cap Js MCP Server vs LinkedIn MCP Server

Cap Js MCP Server vs LinkedIn MCP Server

Both are Grade A and 0.1 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Cap Js MCP Server leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency; LinkedIn MCP Server leads on maintenance and adoption.

A Cap Js MCP Server 88.4

MCP server for AI-assisted development of CAP applications

cap-js/mcp-server · #54 overall · #14 MCP Servers · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Cap Js MCP Server if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+3.3Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 7.9 against 5.2
+2.3Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.9 against 5.2

A LinkedIn MCP Server 88.3

Open-source MCP server for LinkedIn. Give Claude and any MCP-compatible AI agent access to profiles, companies, jobs, and messages.

stickerdaniel/linkedin-mcp-server · #57 overall · #16 MCP Servers · coverage B (3/5)

Choose LinkedIn MCP Server if maintenance and adoption matter most.

+2.8Maintenance: last push 1d ago, against 2d ago
+2.6Adoption: 4.2k GitHub stars against 118

Where they differ

22.2

Safety / IntegrityCap Js MCP Server +3.3

18.9

15.2

TransparencyCap Js MCP Server +2.3

12.9

17.1

MaintenanceLinkedIn MCP Server +2.8

19.9

11.4

AdoptionLinkedIn MCP Server +2.6

14.0

+4.5

Runtime calibrationLinkedIn MCP Server +0.1

+4.6

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Cap Js MCP Server and LinkedIn MCP Server, two MCP Servers projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Cap Js MCP Servercap-js/mcp-server	LinkedIn MCP Serverstickerdaniel/linkedin-mcp-server
HVTrust score	88.4	88.3
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	B
Overall rank	#54	#57
Rank in MCP Servers	#14	#16
GitHub stars	118	4.2k
Last updated	2d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	7.9 / 10	5.2 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	61k/wk	10k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	22.2	18.9
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	15.2	12.9
Maintenance / 20	17.1	19.9
Adoption / 20	11.4	14.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	1 — Anthropic	1 — Anthropic
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	plugins
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Cap Js MCP Server profile LinkedIn MCP Server profile More MCP Servers →

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 v4.4 →