Aevum Security vs Prismix Status MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Aevum Security and Prismix Status MCP 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?

A

Choose Aevum Security when:

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

Explore Aevum Security Details

Choose Prismix Status MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: check_ai_status, get_incident_history, list_ai_services.

Explore Prismix Status MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	A Aevum Security Security	Prismix Status MCP Security
Summary	Browse Aevum Security's Singapore cybersecurity services and submit a business enquiry.	Real-time status for 75+ AI services (OpenAI, Anthropic, Cursor). No auth, CORS-enabled.
Category & Scope	Security	Security
Quality signal

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": {
    "aevum-security": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "aevum-security"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "prismix-status-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "wrangler"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons