Evidra vs Protect MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Evidra and Protect 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?

E

Choose Evidra when:

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

Explore Evidra Details

Choose Protect MCP when:

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

Explore Protect MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	E Evidra Cloud Platforms	Protect MCP Cloud Platforms
Summary	Fail-closed policy guardrails for AI agents running kubectl, terraform, helm, and argocd.	Fail-closed Cedar policy gate + Ed25519 signed receipts for agent tool calls. Denies on any error.
Category & Scope	Cloud Platforms	Cloud Platforms
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": {
    "evidra-2": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "evidra-2"
      ]
    }
  }
}

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

Related MCP Server Comparisons