IntentFence Payment Firewall vs Agentrisk

In-depth architectural comparison of the IntentFence Payment Firewall and Agentrisk 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?

I

Choose IntentFence Payment Firewall when:

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

Explore IntentFence Payment Firewall Details

Choose Agentrisk when:

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

Explore Agentrisk Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	I IntentFence Payment Firewall Finance & Fintech	Agentrisk Finance & Fintech
Summary	Signed U.S. CPI data, Base wallet risk, x402 quote checks, and payment preflights for AI agents.	Pre-trade token risk scoring API for Base tokens, paid via x402.
Category & Scope	Finance & Fintech	Finance & Fintech

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": {
    "intentfence-payment-firewall": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agentrisk": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@modelcontextprotocol/inspector"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons