In-depth architectural comparison of the Skylos and Gatetest 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Skylos
Security · Local stdio
Quality: 59/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Gatetest
Security · Local stdio
Quality: 47/100 (Fair) | Auth: API Key required
Verdict Summary: Choose Skylos if you need specialized Security tools running via a local process. Choose Gatetest if your workspace requires Security integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Skylos 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).
Primary tools included: Dead-code and unused-file detection, Security, secret, and dependency analysis, AI-generated code verification.
You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Paid Service).
Primary tools included: 120+ static-analysis modules across one CLI and GitHub Action, Deterministic AST/rule-based layer runs first — free, millisecond fixes, Claude runs only on patterns the deterministic layers can't resolve.
Dead code detection, security scanning, and code quality analysis for Python, TypeScript, and Go. 98% recall with fewer false positives than Vulture. Includes AI-powered remediation.
111-module QA gate for Claude Code. Scan repos, auto-fix, AI diagnosis. Replaces SonarQube + Snyk.
Skylos is categorized under Security and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Gatetest belongs to Security using local stdio subprocess. Select Skylos when you need capabilities focused on security and Gatetest when you require tools for security.