Decapodkernel MCP vs Ui Ux Suite

In-depth architectural comparison of the Decapodkernel MCP and Ui Ux Suite 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 Decapodkernel 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: create_intent_contract, check_agent_boundary, record_completion_proof.

Explore Decapodkernel MCP Details

Choose Ui Ux Suite 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 Ui Ux Suite Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Decapodkernel MCP Security	Ui Ux Suite Security
Summary	A paid remote MCP for Decapod, built to return verdicts, receipts, usage logs, and audit-ready JSON.	UI/UX design-audit MCP server: scores a project on 12 dimensions vs WCAG 2.2 + APCA.
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": {
    "decapodkernel-mcp": {
      "url": "https://decapodkernel.clauxel.com/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ui-ux-suite": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "ui-ux-suite"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons