ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence)
PYPI · CONVERGEQA-MCP · SCANNED SEP 20
Compare one prompt across a multi-model panel side by side, with public verification receipts.
Available components
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security100
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised native-build step with no shell scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- No production dependencies, so there is no dependency health to assess. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency32
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- License check failed: the license (MIT License) isn't a recognized OSI-approved license. See how to fix → Fail
- Actively maintained (last published 72 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability0
- Schema quality not yet verified: this package declared that it provides tools, but our sandbox run could not list them, so the captured schema is incomplete.Unverified
Stability & Change Management87
- Stability observed for 26 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage0
- Tool coverage not yet verified: this package declared that it provides tools, but our sandbox run could not list them.Unverified
Tool Safety0
- Tool safety not yet verified: this package declared that it provides tools, but our sandbox run could not list them.Unverified
Capabilities20
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2024-11-05; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
Unverified: 3 categories
Categories scored 0 because our sandbox run of this package has not given us the schema these checks need to read. That is a gap on our side rather than a finding about the package, and we only credit what we can confirm, so the score stands at 0 until the capture succeeds. We are working through the fleet, so this normally clears without any action from you. How we score packages →
How do I install the ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) MCP server?
ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx convergeqa-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · convergeqa-mcp
claude mcp add convergeqa-compare -- uvx convergeqa-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"convergeqa-compare": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"convergeqa-mcp"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"convergeqa-compare": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"convergeqa-mcp"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add convergeqa-compare -- uvx convergeqa-mcp
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"convergeqa-compare": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"uvx",
"convergeqa-mcp"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add convergeqa-compare --command uvx --arg convergeqa-mcp
mcp_servers:
convergeqa-compare:
command: "uvx"
args: ["convergeqa-mcp"] {
"McpServers": {
"convergeqa-compare": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "uvx",
"Arguments": [
"convergeqa-mcp"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add convergeqa-compare -t stdio -c uvx -a convergeqa-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"convergeqa-compare": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"convergeqa-mcp"
]
}
}
} Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 19 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 18 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
- 17 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 16 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 14 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Sept 26 −2
- Stability: pass → 0.83 functional
- 11 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 10 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 20 Sept 2026 · Analysed pypi/convergeqa-mcp@0.2.0
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | pypi |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| build_backend | allowlisted | hatchling.build |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
Dependencies 0 packages
| Packages resolved | 0 |
|---|---|
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
The sandbox run completed and this package exposed no tools.
What is the ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) MCP server?
ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.convergeqa/compare. Compare one prompt across a multi-model panel side by side, with public verification receipts. This page covers its PyPI package (convergeqa-mcp).
Is the ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) MCP server safe to use?
ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) scores 49 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 20 September 2026. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) MCP server expose?
ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) exposes no tools. We connected to it and read its tool list, and it was empty, so it offers an MCP client nothing to call.
Is the ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) MCP server still maintained?
ConvergeQA Compare (Due Diligence) is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 20 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.