Head to head
jCodemunch MCP vs Posthog
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
Token-efficient code exploration via tree-sitter AST parsing. 70+ languages, 86-99% token savings.
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 Posthog (77/100 against 66). Posthog is hosted and callable through the gateway; jCodemunch MCP runs on your own machine. jCodemunch MCP has noticeably more public adoption.
| jCodemunch MCP | Posthog | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | C66/100 | B77/100 |
| Adoption | Established | Growing |
| GitHub stars | 2.7k | 0 |
| Downloads / week | 6.0k | – |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | — | 39 |
| Write actions | — | 4 |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | NOASSERTION | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-19 | 2026-09-19 |
| Category | Everything else | Everything else |