mcp-sympy vs stable-hash — Trust Score Comparison

Name: mcp-sympy vs stable-hash Trust Comparison
Creator: Nerq

Side-by-side trust comparison of mcp-sympy and stable-hash. Scores based on security, compliance, maintenance, popularity, and ecosystem signals.

mcp-sympy scores 65.2/100 (B-) while stable-hash scores 56.8/100 (D) on the Nerq Trust Score. mcp-sympy leads by 8.4 points. mcp-sympy is a uncategorized agent with 0 stars. stable-hash is a uncategorized agent with 0 stars.

sympy — Nerq Trust Score 80.8/100 (A-). httpx — Nerq Trust Score 80.8/100 (A-). Nearly identical overall trust.

mcp-sympy

65.2

B-

Categoryuncategorized

Stars0

Sourcemcp_registry

stable-hash

56.8

Categoryuncategorized

Stars0

Sourcenpm_full

Compliance100

Detailed Score Analysis

Dimension	sympy	httpx
Security	90/100	90/100
Maintenance	100/100	100/100
Popularity	100/100	100/100
Quality	65/100	65/100
Community	35/100	35/100

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

Detailed Metric Comparison

Metric	mcp-sympy	stable-hash
Trust Score	65.2/100	56.8/100
Grade	B-	D
Stars	0	0
Category	uncategorized	uncategorized
Security	N/A	N/A
Compliance	N/A	100
Maintenance	N/A	N/A
Documentation	N/A	N/A
EU AI Act Risk	N/A	N/A
Verified	No	No

Verdict

mcp-sympy leads with a trust score of 65.2/100 compared to stable-hash's 56.8/100 (a 8.4-point difference). Both agents should be evaluated based on your specific requirements.

Detailed Analysis

Community & Adoption

mcp-sympy has 0 GitHub stars while stable-hash has 0. Both tools have comparable community sizes, suggesting similar levels of ecosystem support and third-party resources.

When to Choose Each Tool

Choose mcp-sympy if you need:

Higher overall trust score — more reliable for production use

Choose stable-hash if you need:

Consider if it better fits your specific use case

Switching from mcp-sympy to stable-hash (or vice versa)

When migrating between mcp-sympy and stable-hash, consider these factors:

API Compatibility: mcp-sympy (uncategorized) and stable-hash (uncategorized) share similar interfaces since they are in the same category.
Security Review: Run a security audit after migration. Check the mcp-sympy safety report and stable-hash safety report for known issues.
Testing: Ensure your test suite covers all integration points before switching in production.
Community Support: mcp-sympy has 0 stars and stable-hash has 0. Larger communities typically mean better Stack Overflow answers and migration guides.

mcp-sympy Safety Report stable-hash Safety Report mcp-sympy Alternatives stable-hash Alternatives

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is safer, mcp-sympy or stable-hash?

Based on Nerq's independent trust assessment, mcp-sympy has a trust score of 65.2/100 (B-) while stable-hash scores 56.8/100 (D). The 8.4-point difference suggests mcp-sympy has a stronger trust profile. Trust scores are based on security, compliance, maintenance, documentation, and community adoption.

How do mcp-sympy and stable-hash compare on security?

mcp-sympy has a security score of N/A/100 and stable-hash scores N/A/100. There is a notable difference in their security assessments. mcp-sympy's compliance score is N/A/100 (EU risk: N/A), while stable-hash's is 100/100 (EU risk: N/A).

Should I use mcp-sympy or stable-hash?

The choice depends on your requirements. mcp-sympy (uncategorized, 0 stars) and stable-hash (uncategorized, 0 stars) serve similar use cases. On trust, mcp-sympy scores 65.2/100 and stable-hash scores 56.8/100. Review the full KYA reports for each agent before making a decision. Consider factors like integration requirements, documentation quality (N/A vs N/A), and maintenance activity (N/A vs N/A).

Related Comparisons

Last updated: 2026-05-31 | 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.