Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
OpenWork MCP Gateway vs Openpost
In-depth architectural comparison of the OpenWork MCP Gateway and Openpost 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
OpenWork MCP Gateway
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 27/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Openpost
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 41/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose OpenWork MCP Gateway if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Openpost 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?
O
Choose OpenWork MCP Gateway when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
O
Choose Openpost when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
OpenWork MCP Gateway Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Openpost Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
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).
OpenWork MCP Gateway Configuration
Openpost Configuration
Frequently Asked Questions
More alternatives to OpenWork MCP GatewayMore alternatives to OpenpostDeveloper Tools category hubCanonical compare URL