Package Risk vs Agent402.Tools — pay Per Call web tools

In-depth architectural comparison of the Package Risk and Agent402.Tools — pay Per Call web tools 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?

Choose Package Risk 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).

Explore Package Risk Details

Choose Agent402.Tools — pay Per Call web tools 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).

Explore Agent402.Tools — pay Per Call web tools Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Package Risk Developer Tools	Agent402.Tools — pay Per Call web tools Developer Tools
Summary	Package risk checks: maintenance, licence, advisories. Paid per call in USDC, no signup.	1,338 paid agent tools + 42 skill packs. USDC on Base + 3 more chains, or free via proof-of-work.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools

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": {
    "package-risk": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@makosdav/package-risk-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agent402-tools-pay-per-call-web-tools": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "agent402-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons