Codealive MCP vs Poolproof — checks before you commit money

In-depth architectural comparison of the Codealive MCP and Poolproof — checks before you commit money 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 Codealive MCP 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 Codealive MCP Details

P

Choose Poolproof — checks before you commit money 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 Poolproof — checks before you commit money Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Codealive MCP Developer Tools	P Poolproof — checks before you commit money Developer Tools
Summary	Semantic code search and analysis from CodeAlive for AI assistants and agents.	Who launched it, what exit really costs, is the pool what it claims. Facts only, no advice.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools

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": {
    "codealive-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "poolproof-checks-before-you-commit-money": {
      "url": "https://poolproof.ru"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons