Visual Sandbox vs Runno — MCP Server Comparison | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Visual Sandbox vs Runno
In-depth architectural comparison of the Visual Sandbox and Runno 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
Visual Sandbox
Code Execution · Local stdio
Quality: 25/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Runno
Code Execution · Local stdio
Quality: 48/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Visual Sandbox if you need specialized Code Execution tools running via a local process. Choose Runno if your workspace requires Code Execution integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
V
Choose Visual Sandbox when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Code Execution domain.
You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Visual Sandbox is categorized under Code Execution and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Runno belongs to Code Execution using local stdio subprocess. Select Visual Sandbox when you need capabilities focused on code execution and Runno when you require tools for code execution.