Bouncer Gates vs Vibescan MCP Server

In-depth architectural comparison of the Bouncer Gates and Vibescan 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?

B

Choose Bouncer Gates 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 Bouncer Gates Details

Choose Vibescan MCP Server 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 Vibescan MCP Server Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B Bouncer Gates Security	Vibescan MCP Server Security
Summary	Stops secrets, cross-tenant queries and unsafe migrations before they merge.	MCP server for VibeScan — scan projects for leaked secrets and security issues
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": {
    "bouncer-gates": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "bouncer-gates"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "vibescan-mcp-server": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "vibescan-mcp-server"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons