Composio vs mcpc
mcpc leads on trust: 84.3/100 (Grade A) against 76.8/100 (Grade B), a 7.5-point gap. Composio leads on adoption and transparency, and rests on broader evidence; mcpc leads on provenance and supply-chain integrity. Note: mcpc's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.
Composio powers 1000+ toolkits, tool search, context management, authentication, and a sandboxed workbench to help you build AI agents that turn intent into action.
Choose Composio if adoption and transparency matter most.
- +5.4Adoption: 45.6k weekly downloads against 2.5k
- +2.1Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.8 against 5.3
- +1.9Maintenance: last push today, against 2d ago
- A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3
A universal CLI client for MCP. mcpc supports persistent sessions, stdio/HTTP, OAuth 2.1, tasks, JSON output for code mode, proxy for AI sandboxes, x402, and more.
Choose mcpc if provenance and supply-chain integrity matter most.
- +7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
- +5.4Safety / Integrity: 90% of recent commits signed, against 69%
Where they differ
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Composio 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.
Full evidence
| Signal | Composiocomposiohq/composio | mcpcapify/mcpc |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 76.8 | 84.3 |
| Evidence grade | B | A |
| Coverage grade | A | B |
| Overall rank | #190 | #92 |
| Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration | #8 | #5 |
| GitHub stars | 30.3k | 908 |
| Last updated | today | 2d ago |
| Build provenance | No | Yes |
| OSSF Scorecard | 7.8 / 10 | 5.3 / 10 |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Downloads | 46k/wk | 2k/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 13.2 | 18.6 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 10.8 | 18.0 |
| Transparency / 17 | 15.1 | 13.0 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 20.0 | 18.1 |
| Adoption / 20 | 17.0 | 11.6 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | Declared | Implemented |
| External providers | 1 — OpenAI | — |
| Requires API keys | Yes | Yes |
| Plugin surface | plugins | — |
| Provenance drift | Partial | Match |
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 →