Field-by-field comparison

Compare the evidence before choosing an MCP.

Each signal stays separate, missing facts remain visible, and the column order follows your selection.

MCPs in this comparison

CVE MCP Serversemgrep

Uncheck an MCP to remove it. Comparing two or three keeps each signal in its own row.

Comparable alternatives

Azure MCP ServerMCP100 SelectedChrome DevTools MCPMCP100 SelectedContext7 MCPMCP100 SelectedFirecrawl MCPMCP100 SelectedGrafana Cloud MCPMCP100 SelectedMCP Server for WinDbg Crash AnalysisMCP100 Selected

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence field	CVE MCP ServerMCP100 Selected	semgrepMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for	Aggregating CVE, exploit, KEV, EPSS, and related security context from the project's supported sources	Static-analysis and secure-coding investigation within the maintained Semgrep CLI.
Not ideal for	Asset-specific risk acceptance, guaranteed-complete vulnerability scanning, or automated remediation	Teams outside the publisher ecosystem or without least-privilege credentials
Avoid when	A downstream workflow would act on the aggregated result without checking product versions and primary advisory details	The connected identity is broader than the task requires Tool calls cannot be reviewed before consequential mutations
Provenance
Provenance details	Community implementation github:mukul975 · Publisher source ↗	First-party MCP ecosystem:semgrep · Publisher source ↗
Maintenance
Maintenance details	Repo: Aug 5, 2026 Package: Not documented	Repo: Aug 14, 2026 Package: Not documented
Popularity evidence
GitHub stars	1,132 GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	16,224 GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z
External adoption evidence	github: repository stars: 1,132Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗	github: repository stars: 16,224Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
Client coverage
Client coverage details	Claude Code✓ Local stdio Claude Desktop✓ Local stdio Codex✓ Local stdio VS Code✓ Local stdio Cursor✓ Local stdio OpenCode✓ Local stdio	Claude Code✓ Local stdio Claude Desktop✓ Local stdio Codex✓ Local stdio VS Code✓ Local stdio Cursor✓ Local stdio OpenCode✓ Local stdio
Client coverage note	Local stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
Authentication	Optional provider API keys are supplied through environment variables, while many sources work without keys. MCP HTTP client authentication is not documented.	Local scanning needs no remote credential; platform features use Semgrep authentication.
Cost	The open-source server lists many free or no-key sources. Optional provider APIs can impose separate charges or limits; no complete service price is documented.	The MCP integration has no separately verified MCP100 price conclusion. Publisher subscriptions, API usage, compute, storage, and AI-client charges may apply.
Permissions	Queries CVE, IP, domain, hash, package, malware, threat-intelligence, and code-search providers; maintains local cache and audit data. URLScan submission is the documented write-like exception.	Local filesystem scope and optional Semgrep AppSec Platform token permissions define accessible code and findings.
Data handling	CVE IDs, IPs, hashes, domains, and package names can be sent to external APIs, and responses are cached in local SQLite. The publisher says API keys and response payloads are excluded from audit logs; no telemetry and no inbound ports are documented.	Authorized service data and tool results pass through the MCP server to the connected AI client. Review the publisher and client data policies before using sensitive security & testing information.
Limitations
Tradeoffs	One interface can speed triage across many APIs, but upstream coverage, rate limits, identifiers, and freshness differ and can produce conflicting evidence.	Scanning shares source-derived findings with the MCP client and may consume substantial local resources.
Risk context	Broad external intelligence fan-out sends queried indicators off-host; URLScan can submit URLs, and HTTP mode can expose a service endpoint. Keep queries non-sensitive where possible, preserve the documented private-IP blocking, and restrict HTTP exposure.	Scanning shares source-derived findings with the MCP client and may consume substantial local resources. Use a test environment where practical, least-privilege credentials, narrowly enabled tools, and explicit confirmation for mutations. MCP100 did not execute third-party server code during this documentation review.
Evidence date
Editorial review	2026-08-11	2026-07-30
Candidate evidence	2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

Popularity, maintenance, fit, permissions, and client support are independent evidence fields.

Read the evidence method →