Aginx Browser vs AtCoder MCP Server

In-depth architectural comparison of the Aginx Browser and AtCoder MCP Server 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 Aginx Browser 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).

Explore Aginx Browser Details

Choose AtCoder MCP Server when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore AtCoder MCP Server Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	A Aginx Browser Developer Tools	AtCoder MCP Server Developer Tools
Summary	Stealth web browser for agents: search, fetch, click and type through persistent sessions over MCP.	Search AtCoder problems and fetch public problem statements through MCP.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
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": {
    "aginx-browser": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "atcoder-mcp-server": {
      "url": "https://api.ksrnyx.top/oj-mcp/atcoder/mcp"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons