Antigravityextensiongate MCP vs Aiseo Audit

In-depth architectural comparison of the Antigravityextensiongate MCP and Aiseo Audit 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 Antigravityextensiongate MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: check_extension_gate, classify_extension_gap, issue_extension_receipt.

Explore Antigravityextensiongate MCP Details

Choose Aiseo Audit 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 Aiseo Audit Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Antigravityextensiongate MCP Security	Aiseo Audit Security
Summary	Paid remote MCP for Antigravity extension compatibility MCP, structured receipts, audit logs, and re	Audit web pages for AI search readiness (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini).
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": {
    "antigravityextensiongate-mcp": {
      "url": "https://antigravityextensiongate.clauxel.com/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "aiseo-audit": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "aiseo-audit"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons