Human MCP vs toolhive — Trust Score Comparison

Side-by-side trust comparison of Human MCP and toolhive. Scores based on security, compliance, maintenance, popularity, and ecosystem signals.

Human MCP scores 70.2/100 (D) while toolhive scores 0.0/100 (A) on the Nerq Trust Score. Human MCP leads by 70.2 points. Human MCP is a infrastructure agent with 45 stars, Nerq Verified. toolhive is a infrastructure agent with 1,610 stars.
70.2
D verified
Categoryinfrastructure
Stars45
Sourcepulsemcp
Maintenance0
Documentation0
vs
0.0
A
Categoryinfrastructure
Stars1,610
Sourcegithub
Security1
Compliance85
Maintenance1
Documentation1

Detailed Metric Comparison

Metric Human MCP toolhive
Trust Score70.2/1000.0/100
GradeDA
Stars451,610
Categoryinfrastructureinfrastructure
SecurityN/A1
ComplianceN/A85
Maintenance01
Documentation01
EU AI Act RiskN/AN/A
VerifiedYesNo

Verdict

Human MCP leads with a trust score of 70.2/100 compared to toolhive's 0.0/100 (a 70.2-point difference). However, toolhive has stronger community adoption (1,610 vs 45 stars). Both agents should be evaluated based on your specific requirements.

Detailed Analysis

Security

Security scores measure dependency vulnerabilities, CVE exposure, and security practices. Human MCP scores N/A and toolhive scores 1 on this dimension.

Maintenance & Activity

toolhive demonstrates stronger maintenance activity (1/100 vs 0/100). This metric captures commit frequency, issue response times, and release cadence. Actively maintained tools receive faster security patches and are less likely to accumulate technical debt.

Documentation

toolhive has better documentation (1/100 vs 0/100). Good documentation reduces onboarding time and helps teams adopt the tool safely. This score evaluates README completeness, API documentation, code examples, and tutorial availability.

Community & Adoption

Human MCP has 45 GitHub stars while toolhive has 1,610. toolhive has significantly broader community adoption, which typically means more Stack Overflow answers, more third-party tutorials, and faster ecosystem development.

When to Choose Each Tool

Choose Human MCP if you need:

  • Higher overall trust score — more reliable for production use

Choose toolhive if you need:

  • Stronger security profile with fewer known vulnerabilities
  • More actively maintained with faster release cadence
  • Larger community (1,610 vs 45 stars)
  • Better documentation for faster onboarding

Switching from Human MCP to toolhive (or vice versa)

When migrating between Human MCP and toolhive, consider these factors:

  1. API Compatibility: Human MCP (infrastructure) and toolhive (infrastructure) share similar interfaces since they are in the same category.
  2. Security Review: Run a security audit after migration. Check the Human MCP safety report and toolhive safety report for known issues.
  3. Testing: Ensure your test suite covers all integration points before switching in production.
  4. Community Support: Human MCP has 45 stars and toolhive has 1,610. Larger communities typically mean better Stack Overflow answers and migration guides.
Human MCP Safety Report toolhive Safety Report Human MCP Alternatives toolhive Alternatives

Related Pages

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is safer, Human MCP or toolhive?
Based on Nerq's independent trust assessment, Human MCP has a trust score of 70.2/100 (D) while toolhive scores 0.0/100 (A). The 70.2-point difference suggests Human MCP has a stronger trust profile. Trust scores are based on security, compliance, maintenance, documentation, and community adoption.
How do Human MCP and toolhive compare on security?
Human MCP has a security score of N/A/100 and toolhive scores 1/100. There is a notable difference in their security assessments. Human MCP's compliance score is N/A/100 (EU risk: N/A), while toolhive's is 85/100 (EU risk: N/A).
Should I use Human MCP or toolhive?
The choice depends on your requirements. Human MCP (infrastructure, 45 stars) and toolhive (infrastructure, 1,610 stars) serve similar use cases. On trust, Human MCP scores 70.2/100 and toolhive scores 0.0/100. Review the full KYA reports for each agent before making a decision. Consider factors like integration requirements, documentation quality (0 vs 1), and maintenance activity (0 vs 1).

Related Comparisons

Last updated: 2026-11-01 | Data refreshed weekly
Disclaimer: Nerq trust scores are automated assessments based on publicly available signals. They are not endorsements or guarantees. Always conduct your own due diligence.

We use cookies for analytics and caching. Privacy Policy