Head to head
Errata vs jCodemunch MCP
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
Errata
Ccom.apidefects/errataNo reviews yet
What is known to be broken in an MCP server or API operation, with the check that found it.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Token-efficient code exploration via tree-sitter AST parsing. 70+ languages, 86-99% token savings.
Full listingThe 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 (69 and 66 out of 100). Errata is hosted and callable through the gateway; jCodemunch MCP runs on your own machine. jCodemunch MCP has noticeably more public adoption.
| Errata | jCodemunch MCP | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | C69/100 | C66/100 |
| Adoption | New | Established |
| GitHub stars | – | 2.7k |
| Downloads / week | – | 6.0k |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Your machine (local) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | No |
| Tools | 1 | 30 |
| Write actions | — | 1 |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | — | NOASSERTION |
| Last release | — | 2026-09-19 |
| Category | Everything else | Everything else |