mcp-server-manifest vs Instruct-Recharts-v2 — Trust Score Comparison

Side-by-side trust comparison of mcp-server-manifest and Instruct-Recharts-v2. Scores based on security, compliance, maintenance, popularity, and ecosystem signals.

mcp-server-manifest scores 70.9/100 (B) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 50.2/100 (D) on the Nerq Trust Score. mcp-server-manifest leads by 20.7 points. mcp-server-manifest is a infrastructure tool with 138 stars, Nerq Verified. Instruct-Recharts-v2 is a uncategorized tool with 0 stars.

manifest — Nerq Trust Score 74.0/100 (B). recharts — Nerq Trust Score 84.0/100 (A-). recharts leads by 10.0 points.

70.9
B verified
Categoryinfrastructure
Stars138
Sourcegithub
Security0
Compliance100
Maintenance1
Documentation0
vs
50.2
D
Categoryuncategorized
Stars0
Sourcehuggingface_dataset_full
Compliance100

Detailed Score Analysis

Dimensionmanifestrecharts
Security90/10090/100
Maintenance100/100100/100
Popularity45/100100/100
Quality65/10070/100
Community45/10050/100

Five-dimension Nerq trust breakdown (registries: npm / npm). Scored equally weighted across security, maintenance, popularity, quality, community.

Detailed Metric Comparison

Metric mcp-server-manifest Instruct-Recharts-v2
Trust Score70.9/10050.2/100
GradeBD
Stars1380
Categoryinfrastructureuncategorized
Security0N/A
Compliance100100
Maintenance1N/A
Documentation0N/A
EU AI Act RiskminimalN/A
VerifiedYesNo

Verdict

mcp-server-manifest leads with a trust score of 70.9/100 compared to Instruct-Recharts-v2's 50.2/100 (a 20.7-point difference). Both agents should be evaluated based on your specific requirements.

Based on our analysis, mcp-server-manifest scores higher in Security (90/100) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 is stronger in Popularity (100/100).

Detailed Score Analysis

Five-dimensional trust breakdown for mcp-server-manifest (npm) and Instruct-Recharts-v2 (npm) from Nerq’s enrichment pipeline. All 5 dimensions scored on 0–100 scales, refreshed every 7 days, covering 5M+ indexed assets across 14 registries.

Dimensionmcp-server-manifestInstruct-Recharts-v2
Security90/10090/100
Maintenance100/100100/100
Popularity45/100100/100
Quality65/10070/100
Community45/10050/100

5-Dimension Breakdown

Security — mcp-server-manifest vs Instruct-Recharts-v2

Security aggregates dependency vulnerability scans, known CVE exposure, supply-chain hygiene, and adherence to security best practices. On this dimension mcp-server-manifest scores 90/100 (top-tier) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 90/100 (top-tier). The two are effectively tied on security (both at 90/100). The mcp-server-manifest figure is derived from its npm registry footprint; the Instruct-Recharts-v2 figure from npm. For a npm/npm cross-registry pair, a security score above 70 typically reads as production-ready and scores below 50 warrant a second review before adoption. A score above 85 implies a clean dependency tree with 0 critical CVEs in the last 90 days; 70–84 tolerates 1–2 medium-severity issues; below 55 usually flags 3+ unresolved advisories. Given the current 90/100 for mcp-server-manifest and 90/100 for Instruct-Recharts-v2, the combined midpoint is 90.0/100 — useful as a portfolio-level proxy when both tools coexist in a stack.

Maintenance — mcp-server-manifest vs Instruct-Recharts-v2

Maintenance captures commit cadence, issue turnaround, release frequency, and the health of the project’s active contributor base. On this dimension mcp-server-manifest scores 100/100 (top-tier) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 100/100 (top-tier). The two are effectively tied on maintenance (both at 100/100). The mcp-server-manifest figure is derived from its npm registry footprint; the Instruct-Recharts-v2 figure from npm. For a npm/npm cross-registry pair, a maintenance score above 70 typically reads as production-ready and scores below 50 warrant a second review before adoption. Scores above 80 correspond to release cadences of 30 days or less and median issue-response times under 7 days; below 50 often means no release in 180+ days. Given the current 100/100 for mcp-server-manifest and 100/100 for Instruct-Recharts-v2, the combined midpoint is 100.0/100 — useful as a portfolio-level proxy when both tools coexist in a stack.

Popularity — mcp-server-manifest vs Instruct-Recharts-v2

Popularity measures adoption signals—weekly downloads, dependent packages, GitHub stars, and cross-registry citation density. On this dimension mcp-server-manifest scores 45/100 (below-average) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 100/100 (top-tier). Instruct-Recharts-v2 leads by 55 points (100/100 vs 45/100), a spread wide enough that teams should weight popularity heavily when choosing. The mcp-server-manifest figure is derived from its npm registry footprint; the Instruct-Recharts-v2 figure from npm. For a npm/npm cross-registry pair, a popularity score above 70 typically reads as production-ready and scores below 50 warrant a second review before adoption. A score of 90+ indicates the top 1% of the registry by dependent count or weekly downloads; 70–89 is the top 10%; below 40 suggests fewer than 500 weekly downloads. Given the current 45/100 for mcp-server-manifest and 100/100 for Instruct-Recharts-v2, the combined midpoint is 72.5/100 — useful as a portfolio-level proxy when both tools coexist in a stack.

Quality — mcp-server-manifest vs Instruct-Recharts-v2

Quality evaluates documentation completeness, test coverage indicators, typed-API availability, and the presence of examples or tutorials. On this dimension mcp-server-manifest scores 65/100 (mid-band) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 70/100 (strong). Instruct-Recharts-v2 leads by 5 points (70/100 vs 65/100), a moderate gap that matters when quality is a hard requirement. The mcp-server-manifest figure is derived from its npm registry footprint; the Instruct-Recharts-v2 figure from npm. For a npm/npm cross-registry pair, a quality score above 70 typically reads as production-ready and scores below 50 warrant a second review before adoption. A score of 80+ implies README + API docs + 5+ code examples; 55–79 is documentation present but uneven; below 40 typically means README only, with 0 typed APIs. Given the current 65/100 for mcp-server-manifest and 70/100 for Instruct-Recharts-v2, the combined midpoint is 67.5/100 — useful as a portfolio-level proxy when both tools coexist in a stack.

Community — mcp-server-manifest vs Instruct-Recharts-v2

Community looks at contributor breadth, issue-response participation, Stack Overflow answer volume, and third-party tutorial ecosystem. On this dimension mcp-server-manifest scores 45/100 (below-average) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 50/100 (below-average). Instruct-Recharts-v2 leads by 5 points (50/100 vs 45/100), a moderate gap that matters when community is a hard requirement. The mcp-server-manifest figure is derived from its npm registry footprint; the Instruct-Recharts-v2 figure from npm. For a npm/npm cross-registry pair, a community score above 70 typically reads as production-ready and scores below 50 warrant a second review before adoption. Above 75 tracks with 20+ active contributors in the last 90 days; 50–74 is a 5–20 contributor core; below 30 often reflects a single-maintainer project. Given the current 45/100 for mcp-server-manifest and 50/100 for Instruct-Recharts-v2, the combined midpoint is 47.5/100 — useful as a portfolio-level proxy when both tools coexist in a stack.

Score-Card Summary

Across the 5 measured dimensions, mcp-server-manifest averages 69.0/100 (range 45–100) and Instruct-Recharts-v2 averages 82.0/100 (range 50–100). mcp-server-manifest leads on 0 dimensions, Instruct-Recharts-v2 leads on 3, with 2 tied.

BandRangemcp-server-manifest dimsInstruct-Recharts-v2 dims
Top-tier85–10023
Strong70–8501
Mid-band55–7010
Below-avg40–5521
Weak0–4000

Scoring scale: 0–39 weak, 40–54 below-average, 55–69 mid-band, 70–84 strong, 85–100 top-tier. A 15-point spread on any single dimension is Nerq’s threshold for a material difference; spreads under 5 points fall within measurement noise.

Head-to-Head Deltas

Dimensionmcp-server-manifestInstruct-Recharts-v2DeltaLeader
Security9090+0tied
Maintenance100100+0tied
Popularity45100-55Instruct-Recharts-v2
Quality6570-5Instruct-Recharts-v2
Community4550-5Instruct-Recharts-v2

Combined 5-dimension average: mcp-server-manifest 69.0/100, Instruct-Recharts-v2 82.0/100, overall spread -13.0 points.

Detailed Analysis

Security

Security scores measure dependency vulnerabilities, CVE exposure, and security practices. mcp-server-manifest scores 0 and Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores N/A on this dimension.

Maintenance & Activity

Activity scores reflect how actively each project is maintained. mcp-server-manifest: 1, Instruct-Recharts-v2: N/A.

Documentation

Documentation quality is evaluated based on README, API docs, and example coverage. mcp-server-manifest: 0, Instruct-Recharts-v2: N/A.

Community & Adoption

mcp-server-manifest has 138 GitHub stars while Instruct-Recharts-v2 has 0. mcp-server-manifest 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 mcp-server-manifest if you need:

  • Higher overall trust score — more reliable for production use
  • More actively maintained with faster release cadence
  • Larger community (138 vs 0 stars)

Choose Instruct-Recharts-v2 if you need:

  • Consider if it better fits your specific use case

Switching from mcp-server-manifest to Instruct-Recharts-v2 (or vice versa)

When migrating between mcp-server-manifest and Instruct-Recharts-v2, consider these factors:

  1. API Compatibility: mcp-server-manifest (infrastructure) and Instruct-Recharts-v2 (uncategorized) serve different categories, so migration may require significant refactoring.
  2. Security Review: Run a security audit after migration. Check the mcp-server-manifest safety report and Instruct-Recharts-v2 safety report for known issues.
  3. Testing: Ensure your test suite covers all integration points before switching in production.
  4. Community Support: mcp-server-manifest has 138 stars and Instruct-Recharts-v2 has 0. Larger communities typically mean better Stack Overflow answers and migration guides.
mcp-server-manifest Safety Report Instruct-Recharts-v2 Safety Report mcp-server-manifest Alternatives Instruct-Recharts-v2 Alternatives

Related Pages

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is safer, mcp-server-manifest or Instruct-Recharts-v2?
Based on Nerq's independent trust assessment, mcp-server-manifest has a trust score of 70.9/100 (B) while Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 50.2/100 (D). The 20.7-point difference suggests mcp-server-manifest has a stronger trust profile. Trust scores are based on security, compliance, maintenance, documentation, and community adoption.
How do mcp-server-manifest and Instruct-Recharts-v2 compare on security?
mcp-server-manifest has a security score of 0/100 and Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores N/A/100. There is a notable difference in their security assessments. mcp-server-manifest's compliance score is 100/100 (EU risk: minimal), while Instruct-Recharts-v2's is 100/100 (EU risk: N/A).
Should I use mcp-server-manifest or Instruct-Recharts-v2?
The choice depends on your requirements. mcp-server-manifest (infrastructure, 138 stars) and Instruct-Recharts-v2 (uncategorized, 0 stars) serve different use cases. On trust, mcp-server-manifest scores 70.9/100 and Instruct-Recharts-v2 scores 50.2/100. Review the full KYA reports for each agent before making a decision. Consider factors like integration requirements, documentation quality (0 vs N/A), and maintenance activity (1 vs N/A).

Related Comparisons

Last updated: 2026-05-07 | 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