Registry › Compare › Codebase Memory MCP vs KiCad MCP Pro

Codebase Memory MCP vs KiCad MCP Pro

Both are Grade A and 2.6 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Codebase Memory MCP leads on adoption; KiCad MCP Pro leads on supply-chain integrity.

High-performance code intelligence MCP server. Indexes codebases into a persistent knowledge graph — average repo in milliseconds. 158 languages, sub-ms queries, 99% fewer tokens. Single static binary, zero dependencies.

DeusData/codebase-memory-mcp · #12 overall · #3 MCP Servers · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Codebase Memory MCP if adoption matters most.

  • +5.5Adoption: 46.4k GitHub stars against 123
A KiCad MCP Pro 88.9

MCP server for KiCad, connecting AI agents to schematic and PCB workflows, ERC/DRC validation, DFM checks, BOM analysis, and manufacturing preparation—with controlled edits and human-gated release workflows.

oaslananka/kicad-mcp-pro · #34 overall · #7 MCP Servers · coverage B (3/5)

Choose KiCad MCP Pro if supply-chain integrity matters most.

  • +4.2Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 26%

Where they differ

18.9
Safety / IntegrityKiCad MCP Pro +4.2
23.1
15.4
TransparencyKiCad MCP Pro +0.3
15.7
15.5
AdoptionCodebase Memory MCP +5.5
10.0
+3.7
Runtime calibrationCodebase Memory MCP +1.6
+2.1

2 dimensions identical: Identity 18.0 · Maintenance 20.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Codebase Memory MCP and KiCad MCP Pro, 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 Codebase Memory MCPDeusData/codebase-memory-mcp KiCad MCP Prooaslananka/kicad-mcp-pro
HVTrust score 91.5 88.9
Evidence grade A A
Coverage grade B B
Overall rank #12 #34
Rank in MCP Servers #3 #7
GitHub stars 46.4k 123
Last updated today today
Build provenance Yes Yes
OSSF Scorecard 8.1 / 10 8.5 / 10
License MIT MIT
Downloads 2k/wk 6k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 18.9 23.1
Identity & provenance / 18 18.0 18.0
Transparency / 17 15.4 15.7
Maintenance / 20 20.0 20.0
Adoption / 20 15.5 10.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented Implemented
External providers — 3 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI
Requires API keys No No
Plugin surface — plugins
Provenance drift Match Match
Open in the live compare tool → Codebase Memory MCP profile KiCad MCP Pro 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 →