RegistryCompare › MCP Apps vs mcpc

MCP Apps vs mcpc

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

MCP Apps leads on trust — 84.5/100 (Grade A) vs 81.3/100 (Grade A), a 3.2-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal MCP Appsmodelcontextprotocol/ext-apps mcpcapify/mcpc
HVTrust score 84.5 81.3
Evidence grade A A
Coverage grade B B
Overall rank #60 #85
Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration #4 #5
GitHub stars 2.8k 756
Last updated 18d ago 4d ago
Build provenance Yes Yes
OSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10 4.6 / 10
License NOASSERTION Apache-2.0
Downloads 1.6M/wk 1k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 19.6 17.7
Identity & provenance / 18 18.0 18.0
Transparency / 17 13.3 12.4
Maintenance / 20 11.4 17.1
Adoption / 20 16.5 11.1
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 mcpc 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 →