Make Audit MCP vs Squirrelscan

In-depth architectural comparison of the Make Audit MCP and Squirrelscan 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?

M

Choose Make Audit MCP 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 Make Audit MCP Details

Choose Squirrelscan 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 Squirrelscan Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	M Make Audit MCP Security	Squirrelscan Security
Summary	Audit Make.com blueprints before importing: hardcoded secrets, dangling refs, risky settings.	Audit websites for SEO, performance, security, accessibility and agent experience issues.
Category & Scope	Security	Security
Quality signal

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": {
    "make-audit-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "make-audit-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "squirrelscan": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons