Registry › Compare › KiCad MCP Pro vs SearXNG Search

KiCad MCP Pro vs SearXNG Search

Both are Grade A and 0.4 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. KiCad MCP Pro leads on supply-chain integrity and maintenance; SearXNG Search leads on adoption.

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 and maintenance matter most.

+4.5Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 0%
+0.8Maintenance: last push today, against 1d ago

A SearXNG Search 89.3

Private web search for AI assistants via SearXNG — supports Claude, Cursor, and any MCP client

ihor-sokoliuk/mcp-searxng · #30 overall · #4 MCP Servers · coverage B (3/5)

Choose SearXNG Search if adoption matters most.

+2.8Adoption: 9.8k weekly downloads against 5.7k

Where they differ

23.1

Safety / IntegrityKiCad MCP Pro +4.5

18.6

15.7

TransparencySearXNG Search +0.4

16.1

20.0

MaintenanceKiCad MCP Pro +0.8

19.2

10.0

AdoptionSearXNG Search +2.8

12.8

+2.1

Runtime calibrationSearXNG Search +2.5

+4.6

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of KiCad MCP Pro and SearXNG Search, 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	KiCad MCP Prooaslananka/kicad-mcp-pro	SearXNG Searchihor-sokoliuk/mcp-searxng
HVTrust score	88.9	89.3
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	B
Overall rank	#34	#30
Rank in MCP Servers	#7	#4
GitHub stars	123	1.3k
Last updated	today	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	8.5 / 10	8.9 / 10
License	MIT	MIT
Downloads	6k/wk	10k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	23.1	18.6
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	15.7	16.1
Maintenance / 20	20.0	19.2
Adoption / 20	10.0	12.8
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 → KiCad MCP Pro profile SearXNG Search 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 →