Kevscope vs Agentward

In-depth architectural comparison of the Kevscope and Agentward 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?

K

Choose Kevscope 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 Kevscope Details

Choose Agentward 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).
• Primary tools included: read_file, read_text_file, read_media_file.

Explore Agentward Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	K Kevscope Security	Agentward agentward-ai Security
Summary	CVE patch priority from CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS, CVSS and SSVC; exploited-CVE feeds.	Permission control plane for AI agents. MCP proxy that enforces least-privilege YAML policies on every tool call, classifies sensitive data (PII/PHI), detects dangerous skill chains, and generates compliance audit trails. Supports stdio and HTTP proxy modes.
Category & Scope	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": {
    "kevscope": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "kevscope"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agentward-ai-agentward": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@modelcontextprotocol/server-filesystem"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons