CostPilot vs Cloudscope MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the CostPilot and Cloudscope 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 CostPilot when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Cloud Platforms domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Paid Service).
• Primary tools included: AWS service spend breakdowns, Cloud-spend anomaly detection, Savings analysis.

Explore CostPilot Details

Choose Cloudscope MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Cloud Platforms domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: other (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: get_cost_summary, detect_anomalies, list_recommendations.

Explore Cloudscope MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	C CostPilot Cloud Platforms	Cloudscope MCP alexpota Cloud Platforms
Summary	Hosted MCP server for AWS cloud spend: service breakdowns, anomalies, savings and forecasts.	Azure cloud cost management — spending analysis, forecasts, anomaly detection, budgets, optimization recommendations, idle resource detection, tag-based cost allocation, and cross-subscription queries through natural language.
Category & Scope	Cloud Platforms

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

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "alexpota-cloudscope-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "cloudscope-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons