Mmcp.market

Head to head

Auth Token Traced Service vs Filamental

Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.

Auth Token Traced Serviceai.getvda/auth-token-mcp-traced-service
C
No reviews yet

Auth Token MCP Traced Service

Full listing
Filamentalio.github.Scottnine/filamental
A
No reviews yet

Read/write access to your Filamental knowledge graph vault. 17 tools. Local-first, no auth.

Full listing

The short version

Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Filamental (85/100 against 62). Auth Token Traced Service is hosted and callable through the gateway; Filamental runs on your own machine. Filamental has noticeably more public adoption.

 Auth Token Traced ServiceFilamental
User ratingNo reviews yetNo reviews yet
Safety gradeC62/100A85/100
AdoptionNewGrowing
GitHub stars–2
Downloads / week–53
Runs whereHosted (remote)Your machine (local)
Gateway-readyYesNo
Tools—17
Write actions—5
Price per callFreeFree
Licence—NOASSERTION
Last release—2026-09-16
CategorySecuritySecurity

Other comparisons

Auth Token Traced Service vs WWW-Authenticate scheme token, value discardedAuth Token Traced Service vs MCPProxyAuth Token Traced Service vs spintax.net MCP serverAuth Token Traced Service vs Ticket DemoAuth Token Traced Service vs MCP ServerAll Security servers