Exogram Authority Runtime vs Fantasy Football Manager

In-depth architectural comparison of the Exogram Authority Runtime and Fantasy Football Manager 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 Exogram Authority Runtime 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 Exogram Authority Runtime Details

F

Choose Fantasy Football Manager 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 Fantasy Football Manager Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Exogram Authority Runtime Developer Tools	F Fantasy Football Manager Developer Tools
Summary	Model Context Protocol server for the Exogram Authority Runtime.	ESPN draft and lineup analysis for Codex and MCP clients. Live actions use the ESPN companion.
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": {
    "exogram-authority-runtime": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@modelcontextprotocol/server-memory"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "fantasy-football-manager": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "fantasy-football-manager"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons