MCPJungle vs metamcp
Self-hosted MCP gateways compared
MCPJungle and metamcp consolidate multiple MCP servers behind endpoints that clients can use. MCPJungle focuses on server registration, tool groups, and deployment options, while metamcp adds namespaces, middleware, and OpenAPI endpoints alongside MCP access.
MCPJungle: Manage MCP Servers Behind One Endpoint
MCPJungle is a self-hosted gateway for registering MCP servers and connecting AI clients through one endpoint. It supports local setups and shared team deployments with tool filtering and access controls.
metamcp: Combine MCP Servers Behind One Gateway
MetaMCP combines configured MCP servers into unified endpoints and applies namespace-level controls. It suits teams hosting and managing MCP tools for multiple clients, but its development is currently quiet and recent pull-request activity is absent.
| MCPJungle | metamcp | |
|---|---|---|
| Language | Go | TypeScript |
| License | MPL-2.0 | MIT |
| Stars | 1.3k | 2.7k |
| Forks | 167 | 436 |
| Last analyzed | Oct 10, 2026 | Oct 9, 2026 |
Key differences
- MCPJungle supports Streamable HTTP and stdio upstream servers; metamcp groups servers into namespaces and exposes them through SSE, Streamable HTTP, or OpenAPI endpoints.
- MCPJungle offers bearer tokens and custom headers for upstream HTTP servers, plus enterprise client authentication and server access controls; metamcp supports API keys, MCP OAuth, and OIDC sign-in for its management interface.
- MCPJungle provides tool groups for exposing selected tools through separate endpoints; metamcp offers namespace-level middleware, tool renaming, description changes, and annotations.
- MCPJungle is written in Go and licensed under MPL-2.0; metamcp is written in TypeScript and licensed under MIT.
- MCPJungle supports SQLite for local use and PostgreSQL for deployments; metamcp's deployment notes recommend at least 2–4 GB of memory for online or VPS use.
- The supplied project figures list 1.3k stars and 164 forks for MCPJungle, and 2.7k stars and 436 forks for metamcp. Both are unarchived.
Choose MCPJungle if you…
- need a gateway that accepts stdio as well as Streamable HTTP upstream servers.
- want to use SQLite for local operation or PostgreSQL for a deployment.
- need centralized bearer-token and custom-header configuration for upstream HTTP servers.
Choose metamcp if you…
- want to expose MCP integrations through OpenAPI as well as MCP endpoints.
- need namespaces with middleware, tool customization, or endpoint-wide and per-user rate limits.
- want API key or MCP OAuth endpoint security and OIDC sign-in for the management interface.
Compare the numbers side by side, or add more projects
This comparison is generated with AI from the OSRepos analyses of both projects. Always check each project's repository and documentation before choosing.