Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Codeinspectus vs Agentscore Mcp Server
In-depth architectural comparison of the Codeinspectus and Agentscore Mcp Server 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
Codeinspectus
Security · Local stdio
Quality: 65/100 (Great) | Auth: API Key required
Agentscore Mcp Server
Security · Local stdio
Quality: 51/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Codeinspectus if you need specialized Security tools running via a local process. Choose Agentscore Mcp Server if your workspace requires Security integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Codeinspectus when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Free / Open Source).
- You have access to required keys:
CODEINSPECTUS_API_KEY. - Primary tools included: codeinspectus_scan, codeinspectus_rescan, codeinspectus_compliance_report.
Choose Agentscore Mcp Server 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).
- Primary tools included: Security scans for MCP packages, Allow, warn, or block trust verdicts, Repository-wide MCP dependency inspection.
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Codeinspectus Tools (6)
codeinspectus_scan
Run a full local security scan of a path: bundled engines (Opengrep SAST, Gitleaks secrets, Trivy SCA/IaC/license), CodeInspectus's offline native Pub SCA, plus AI-code-specific checks (client-side secret exposure, Supabase RLS/inverted-auth, prompt-injection sinks, API-boundary failures, and explicit runtime-control misconfiguration). Returns CWE-keyed findings with fix recommendations, detected repository technologies, explicit native-pack execution counts, compliance tags, and three-state repository evidence for supported runtime controls. Fully offline — zero network egress at scan time. Never writes to your code or repo.
codeinspectus_rescan
Re-run a scan after fixes were applied and diff against a prior scan_id (or the most recent scan of the same path). Reports which findings are resolved, which remain, and which were newly introduced, plus fresh technology and native-pack execution coverage. Use this to verify fixes. Never writes to your code or repo.
codeinspectus_compliance_report
Produce a per-framework code-level control-coverage view for a prior scan (NIST CSF 2.0, ISO 27001:2022, SOC 2, CIS v8.1, Essential Eight, OWASP Web/LLM). Reports 'X of N code-visible controls have findings' with the code-visible subset as the explicit denominator. This is NOT a compliance audit, certification, or attestation — code-level evidence only.
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).
Codeinspectus Configuration
Agentscore Mcp Server Configuration
