Abnormal Security MCP vs COTI Private Messaging

In-depth architectural comparison of the Abnormal Security MCP and COTI Private Messaging 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 Abnormal Security MCP when:

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

Explore Abnormal Security MCP Details

Choose COTI Private Messaging when:

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

Explore COTI Private Messaging Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Abnormal Security MCP Communication	COTI Private Messaging Communication
Summary	Abnormal Security email threats, cases, and reporting in your terminal and your AI agents.	Private encrypted agent messaging, hidden state exchange, delegation, and private inbox workflows.
Category & Scope	Communication	Communication

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": {
    "abnormal-security-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "coti-private-messaging": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "-p"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons