MCP Blast-Radius Auditor vs uselessfacts

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

MetricMCP Blast-Radius AuditorMCP Server uselessfactsMCP Server

Type: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorMCP Server; uselessfactsMCP Server
Category: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorOther; uselessfactsOther
GitHub stars: MCP Blast-Radius Auditor0; uselessfacts0
Trust scoreⓘAuditability and maintenance signals — not a security audit.: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorNot yet assessed; uselessfacts74/100 · Good
Community rating: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorNo reviews yet; uselessfactsNo reviews yet
Last commit: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorUnknown; uselessfacts58 days ago
Licence: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorNone declared; uselessfactsMIT
Official: MCP Blast-Radius AuditorNo; uselessfactsNo
Source: MCP Blast-Radius Auditor Repository; uselessfacts 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.