MCP CPG Human in the… vs Exogram Authority Run… | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL) vs Exogram Authority Runtime
In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL) and Exogram Authority Runtime 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL)
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 36/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Exogram Authority Runtime
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 41/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL) if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose Exogram Authority Runtime if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL) when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL) is categorized under Developer Tools and uses a remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. In contrast, Exogram Authority Runtime belongs to Developer Tools using local stdio subprocess. Select MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL) when you need capabilities focused on developer tools and Exogram Authority Runtime when you require tools for developer tools.