Official MCP Registry vs Composio
Agent-native side-by-side. Scores are curated estimates on a 0–10 scale. Lock-in: higher = worse. Prefer JTBD picks via /api/decide when choosing for a job.
| Dimension | Official MCP Registry | Composio |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | 8.2 | 7.6 |
| Capability fit | 7.0 | 8.2 |
| Price / performance | 9.8 | 7.5 |
| Latency / reliability | 8.5 | 7.8 |
| Developer & agent DX | 7.5 | 8.8 |
| Privacy / data retention | 9.0 | 7.2 |
| Lock-in risk (higher = worse) | 1.0 | 5.8 |
| Maturity / track record | 7.5 | 7.2 |
| Pricing | As of 2026-10-24 (https://modelcontextprotocol.io/registry/registry-aggregators; https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/blob/main/docs/reference/api/official-registry-api.md): 'The MCP Registry provides an unau… | As of 2026-10-24 (composio.dev/pricing, fetched 2026-10-24; 'New pricing applies to signups on or after August 15, 2026'): Hobby $0 — '100,000 tool calls, 50,000 triggers, and 3 team members included free each month'; 'T… |
| Tagline | Source of truth for MCP server metadata and the Depot pick for mcp-discovery since 2026-10-24… | Depot pick for tool/MCP router with managed OAuth across 1500+ apps. Official rate card is now public — Hobby… |
Official MCP Registry
Source of truth for MCP server metadata and the Depot pick for mcp-discovery since 2026-10-24 (replacing Smithery, whose connection services end 2026-10-31). Not a hosting runtime; see mcp-server-hosting. Strengths: Canonical metadata source of truth; Unauthenticated read-only REST API for agent discovery; Vendor-neutr
Strengths
- Canonical metadata source of truth
- Unauthenticated read-only REST API for agent discovery
- Vendor-neutral
Weaknesses
- Not a turnkey hosting/OAuth product
- Sparse UX vs Glama/PulseMCP directories
- Quality signals limited vs commercial indexes
Composio
Depot pick for tool/MCP router with managed OAuth across 1500+ apps. Official rate card is now public — Hobby is real free for light agents; Pro is the agent-scale default. Not a compute fabric; pair with E2B/Browserbase when you need sandboxes/browsers. Strengths: Huge tool catalog + MCP; Managed OAuth; Fast agent int
Strengths
- Huge tool catalog + MCP
- Managed OAuth
- Fast agent integration
Weaknesses
- Abstraction over underlying tools
- Pricing can surprise at scale
- Dependency for critical workflows
More pairs: anthropic-vs-openai · openai-vs-google-ai · groq-vs-fireworks · fireworks-vs-together · qdrant-vs-pinecone · pinecone-vs-supabase-pgvector · e2b-vs-modal · browserbase-vs-firecrawl