RegistryCompare › MCP Apps vs MCP Inspector

MCP Apps vs MCP Inspector

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of MCP Apps and MCP Inspector, 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.

MCP Inspector leads on trust — 89.8/100 (Grade A) vs 86.3/100 (Grade A), a 3.5-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal MCP Appsmodelcontextprotocol/ext-apps MCP Inspectormodelcontextprotocol/inspector
HVTrust score 86.3 89.8
Evidence grade A A
Coverage grade B B
Overall rank #38 #12
Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration #3 #1
GitHub stars 2.7k 10.7k
Last updated 3d ago 3d ago
Build provenance Yes Yes
OSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10 6.1 / 10
License NOASSERTION NOASSERTION
Downloads 1.6M/wk 185k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 19.6 18.7
Identity & provenance / 18 18.0 18.0
Transparency / 17 13.3 13.7
Maintenance / 20 13.5 19.8
Adoption / 20 16.5 16.7
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented Implemented
External providers 1 — Anthropic
Requires API keys No Yes
Plugin surface plugins
Provenance drift Match Match
Open in the live compare tool → MCP Apps profile MCP Inspector 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 →