Capacity Attest vs BridgeNode MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Capacity Attest and BridgeNode MCP 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?

C

Choose Capacity Attest when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Finance & Fintech domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Capacity Attest Details

Choose BridgeNode MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Finance & Fintech domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore BridgeNode MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	C Capacity Attest Finance & Fintech	BridgeNode MCP Finance & Fintech
Summary	Signed delivery claims for x402 capacity trades: GPU-hours, storage, API credits, bandwidth.	AI inference via MCP — pay per request with Solana USDC through x402. No API keys.
Category & Scope	Finance & Fintech	Finance & Fintech

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": {
    "capacity-attest": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "capacity-attest"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bridgenode-mcp-2": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons