FeedOracle Compliance Agent vs MCP Seatbelt

In-depth architectural comparison of the FeedOracle Compliance Agent and MCP Seatbelt 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 FeedOracle Compliance Agent 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 FeedOracle Compliance Agent Details

Choose MCP Seatbelt 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 MCP Seatbelt Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	FeedOracle Compliance Agent Security	MCP Seatbelt Security
Summary	MiCA compliance evidence, stablecoin risk, macro regime, agent governance. 79 tools.	MCP runtime security proxy. Blocks dangerous AI agent tool calls with a policy engine.
Category & Scope	Security	Security

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": {
    "feedoracle-compliance-agent": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "anthropic"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-seatbelt": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@kryptosai/mcp-seatbelt"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons