habitat vs iota-mcp

Side by side on the facts. GitHub figures come straight from each repository; ratings come from signed-in reviewers here.

MetrichabitatMCP Server iota-mcpMCP Server

Type: habitatMCP Server; iota-mcpMCP Server
Category: habitatOther; iota-mcpOther
GitHub stars: habitat0; iota-mcp0
Trust scoreⓘAuditability and maintenance signals — not a security audit.: habitatNot yet assessed; iota-mcp74/100 · Good
Community rating: habitatNo reviews yet; iota-mcpNo reviews yet
Last commit: habitatUnknown; iota-mcp76 days ago
Licence: habitatNone declared; iota-mcpNOASSERTION
Official: habitatNo; iota-mcpNo
Source: habitat Repository; iota-mcp Repository

Highlighted cells win that row on an objective measure. Rows without a clear winner — category, licence, source — are left unmarked. A higher trust score means better auditability and maintenance, not safer code.