Head to head
Healthclaw Guardrails vs Anaconda MCP
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Guardrailed FHIR access for AI agents: PHI redaction, audit trail, step-up auth, tenant isolation
Full listing
The short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. Both score close on the safety scan (87 and 90 out of 100). Healthclaw Guardrails is hosted and callable through the gateway; Anaconda MCP runs on your own machine.
| Healthclaw Guardrails | Anaconda MCP | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A87/100 | A90/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | Growing |
| GitHub stars | 30 | 4 |
| Downloads / week | – | – |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Your machine (local) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | No |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | BSD-3-Clause |
| Last release | 2026-09-25 | 2026-09-15 |
| Category | Security | Security |