Agent Trust vs Markus Tenghamn — MCP Server Comparison | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Agent Trust vs Markus Tenghamn
In-depth architectural comparison of the Agent Trust and Markus Tenghamn 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Agent Trust
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 45/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Markus Tenghamn
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 30/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Agent Trust if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Markus Tenghamn if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
A
Choose Agent Trust when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Agent Trust is categorized under Developer Tools and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Markus Tenghamn belongs to Developer Tools using remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. Select Agent Trust when you need capabilities focused on developer tools and Markus Tenghamn when you require tools for developer tools.