Head to head
Ausca vs Gateway
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
Pay-per-call APIs and MCP services for agents, no accounts or keys, with verifiable receipts.
Full listing
No reviews yet
MCP gateway with runtime security policy, tool-call-level control, and audit of agent actions.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Gateway (97/100 against 84). Ausca has noticeably more public adoption.
| Ausca | Gateway | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | B84/100 | A97/100 |
| Adoption | Established | Growing |
| GitHub stars | 15 | 1 |
| Downloads / week | 220 | – |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | Yes |
| Tools | 14 | — |
| Write actions | 2 | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-05 |
| Category | AI and agents | AI and agents |