Head to head
MCP vs Passiv Web Tools
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Security tools for your AI: scan, pentest, check headers, guard code and scan repos for secrets.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Free web tools for AI agents: HTML to Markdown, compliance scan, page profile, security headers.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours MCP (86/100 against 70). MCP has noticeably more public adoption.
| MCP | Passiv Web Tools | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A86/100 | B70/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | New |
| GitHub stars | 1 | 0 |
| Downloads / week | 778 | – |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Your machine (local) |
| Gateway-ready | No | No |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-11 | 2026-09-07 |
| Category | Security | Security |