Superpowers vs Context7

A label partly reflects how much of each tool is visible and scannable, not only how risky it is. A tool without a lockfile cannot get a dependency check.

• Superpowers: code and instruction-file checks found nothing, but there is no runtime lockfile or manifest, so dependencies were not checked
• Context7: 2 critical-severity known vulnerabilities in runtime dependencies (OSV)

Superpowers scores 5 points higher in Week 45: Superpowers 62, Context7 57 out of 100. The score combines maintenance, adoption and docs (percentiles of public GitHub signals): Superpowers 22, 98 and 69; Context7 67, 39 and 69. Community (20% weight) is not measured yet. It is not a hands-on test, so a higher score does not say which tool suits your project.

Safety labels from the automated scan of 2 Nov 2026: Superpowers: No dependencies scanned, code checks clean, no lockfile to check; Context7: Caution, 2 critical-severity known vulnerabilities in runtime dependencies (OSV). “No dependencies scanned” means the code checks were clean but there is no lockfile, so dependencies could not be checked; it is not a clean bill. It is an automated scan, not a manual audit.

By GitHub stars: Superpowers 310,769, Context7 64,060. Adoption score (percentile among all 52 tracked tools): Superpowers 98, Context7 39. Stars are one public signal and do not measure real-world use.

Superpowers: MIT; Context7: MIT. Read each licence text before commercial use.

Pick Superpowers if you want the more widely adopted option (adoption 98). Pick Context7 if recent activity and releases matter most to you (maintenance 67); you want to run it on your own machine (local install found in the README). This comes from measured public data and licences only, not from hands-on testing.