Registry › Compare › MCP Inspector vs mcpc

MCP Inspector vs mcpc

MCP Inspector leads on trust: 91.5/100 (Grade A) against 82.9/100 (Grade A), a 8.6-point gap. MCP Inspector leads on transparency and adoption.

A MCP Inspector 91.5

Visual testing tool for MCP servers

modelcontextprotocol/inspector · #13 overall · #3 Protocols & Tool Integration · coverage B (3/5)

Choose MCP Inspector if transparency and adoption matter most.

+5.2Adoption: 264.8k weekly downloads against 2.2k
+2.4Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.3 against 4.5
+1.7Maintenance
+0.7Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 7.3 against 4.5

A mcpc 82.9

The most compatible MCP CLI client. Supports: tools, resources, prompts, completions, async tasks, skills, stdio and Streamable HTTP (MCP 2026-07-28 and 2025-11-25). Persistent sessions, OAuth 2.1 with DCR, CIMD, client credentials, and ID-JAG, OS keychain, --json for code mode, grep across…

apify/mcpc · #121 overall · #8 Protocols & Tool Integration · coverage B (3/5)

mcpc doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.

Where they differ

18.6

Safety / IntegrityMCP Inspector +0.7

17.9

14.7

TransparencyMCP Inspector +2.4

12.3

19.7

MaintenanceMCP Inspector +1.7

18.0

16.9

AdoptionMCP Inspector +5.2

11.7

+3.6

Runtime calibrationmcpc +1.4

+5.0

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of MCP Inspector 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	MCP Inspectormodelcontextprotocol/inspector	mcpcapify/mcpc
HVTrust score	91.5	82.9
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	B
Overall rank	#13	#121
Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration	#3	#8
GitHub stars	11.1k	1.1k
Last updated	5d ago	2d ago
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	7.3 / 10	4.5 / 10
License	NOASSERTION	Apache-2.0
Downloads	265k/wk	2k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	18.6	17.9
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	14.7	12.3
Maintenance / 20	19.7	18.0
Adoption / 20	16.9	11.7
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	—	—
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	—	—
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → MCP Inspector 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 v4.4 →