Exogram Authority Runtime vs Transitland MCP Server

In-depth architectural comparison of the Exogram Authority Runtime and Transitland MCP Server 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

Choose Transitland MCP Server 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 Transitland MCP Server Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Exogram Authority Runtime Developer Tools	Transitland MCP Server Developer Tools
Summary	Model Context Protocol server for the Exogram Authority Runtime.	Global transit via Transitland v2 — operators, GTFS/GTFS-RT/GBFS feeds, routes, stops, departures.
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": {
    "transitland-mcp-server": {
      "command": "bunx",
      "args": [
        "@cyanheads/transitland-mcp-server@latest"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons