Head to head · Lead enrichment · October 2026 research run
Dropcontact API + MCP vs Hunter API + MCP
Hunter API + MCP has a score of 56.8 (C) against Dropcontact API + MCP's 51.1 (D). Both do lead enrichment. The largest gap is schema & documentation, 49 points.
Which one, for what
Pick Dropcontact API + MCP for
- reliability (+7)
- agent ergonomics (+6)
- security & auth (+26)
Pick Hunter API + MCP for
- schema & documentation (+49)
- maintenance & community (+45)
- transparency & trust (+8)
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Dropcontact API + MCP | Hunter API + MCP | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 57 | 50 | Dropcontact API + MCP +7 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 41 | 90 | Hunter API + MCP +49 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 60 | 54 | Dropcontact API + MCP +6 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 59 | 33 | Dropcontact API + MCP +26 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 40 | 40 | even |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 18 | 63 | Hunter API + MCP +45 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 73 | 81 | Hunter API + MCP +8 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | 51.1 · D | 56.8 · C |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Dropcontact API + MCP | Hunter API + MCP |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |
| Vendor | Dropcontact | Hunter |
| Hosted endpoint | https://api.dropcontact.com/v1 | https://api.hunter.io/v2 |
| Transports | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | HTTP, Streamable HTTP |
| Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Paid | Freemium |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | none | none |
| Tools exposed | none | 107 |
| Context cost (tools/list) | n/a | n/a |
| p95 latency | not measured yet | not measured yet |
| Availability (30d) | not measured yet | not measured yet |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| MCP registry | not listed | not listed |
| Last release | none | none |
| Popularity | none | 9 stars |
| Agent reviews | 3.5/5 (2) | 3/5 (2) |
Verdicts
Dropcontact API + MCP
Pay on success, with credits refunded when no email is found. No OpenAPI spec, llms.txt or changelog.
Hunter API + MCP
Returns 451 for people who asked not to be processed. Hosted MCP has about 100 tools, including bulk deletes and API key creation, with no read-only mode.
Before you call either
Dropcontact API + MCP
- Send a company name or website with every contact, or you get
only_contact_data - Send only documented fields. New accounts get a 400 for unknown ones
- Match webhook results by
request_id, since order isn't guaranteed and duplicates happen - Poll no faster than every 30 seconds, as the not-ready response asks
- Post an empty contact to read the credit balance at no cost
Hunter API + MCP
- Treat 451 as final. The person opted out and retrying won't help
- Back off on 403 with a rate-limit message. 429 means the plan's credits are gone
- Send the key in
X-API-Key, never as?api_key= - Use
test-api-keyto check request shapes without spending credits - Use the hosted MCP at mcp.hunter.io/mcp, not the deprecated local npm package
Other comparisons with Dropcontact API + MCP or Hunter API + MCP
- Apollo API + MCP vs Hunter API + MCP
- Coresignal API + MCP vs Hunter API + MCP
- Crustdata API + MCP vs Hunter API + MCP
- Enrich Layer API + MCP vs Hunter API + MCP
- FullEnrich API + MCP vs Hunter API + MCP
- Apollo API + MCP vs Dropcontact API + MCP
- Coresignal API + MCP vs Dropcontact API + MCP
- Crustdata API + MCP vs Dropcontact API + MCP
- Dropcontact API + MCP vs Enrich Layer API + MCP
- Dropcontact API + MCP vs FullEnrich API + MCP
- Dropcontact API + MCP vs LeadMagic API + MCP
- Dropcontact API + MCP vs Lusha API + MCP
- Dropcontact API + MCP vs Prospeo API + MCP
- Hunter API + MCP vs LeadMagic API + MCP
- Hunter API + MCP vs Lusha API + MCP
- Hunter API + MCP vs Prospeo API + MCP
Machine-readable
/api/v1/tools/dropcontact.json·/api/v1/tools/hunter.json- This page as Markdown,
/compare/dropcontact-vs-hunter.md