QnEvt Verifiable Randomness MCP vs XProof

In-depth architectural comparison of the QnEvt Verifiable Randomness MCP and XProof MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose QnEvt Verifiable Randomness MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Cryptography domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore QnEvt Verifiable Randomness MCP Details

Choose XProof when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Cryptography domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore XProof Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	QnEvt Verifiable Randomness MCP Cryptography	XProof Cryptography
Summary	Verifiable random decisions, audit sampling, fair selection, and proof verification using QnEvt.	Proof primitive for AI agents on MultiversX. Anchor file hashes on-chain as verifiable proofs.
Category & Scope	Cryptography	Cryptography

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "qnevt-verifiable-randomness-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "qnevt-verifiable-randomness-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "xproof": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "xproof"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons