Vibgrate MCP vs Attestix

In-depth architectural comparison of the Vibgrate MCP and Attestix 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?

V

Choose Vibgrate MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Vibgrate MCP Details

Choose Attestix 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 Attestix Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	V Vibgrate MCP Security	Attestix Security
Summary	Query your team's drift, vulnerability, and upgrade data from any AI assistant. OAuth 2.1, 51 tools.	AI agent identity, W3C credentials, EU AI Act compliance. 47 MCP tools.
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": {
    "mcp-157": {
      "url": "https://vibgrate.com/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "attestix": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "attestix"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons