Agent Security Scanner MCP vs Pushary

In-depth architectural comparison of the Agent Security Scanner MCP and Pushary 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 Agent Security Scanner 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).

Explore Agent Security Scanner MCP Details

Choose Pushary 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: send_notification, ask_user, wait_for_answer.

Explore Pushary Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Agent Security Scanner MCP Security	Pushary Security
Summary	Security layer for AI agents: blocks prompt injection, detects fake packages, scans vulnerabilities.	Push notifications and human-in-the-loop approvals for AI agents, with a cross-agent audit trail.
Category & Scope	Security	Security

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": {
    "agent-security-scanner-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "agent-security-scanner-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "pushary": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@pushary/agent-hooks@latest"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons