Comparison

Clawvisor vs Arcade: 2026 Comparison

Two ways to keep agents in bounds: scope authorization wired into a runtime you build on, or intent-based authorization at a gateway in front of agents you already run.

The verdict

Arcade is the typical choice for developers building multi-user agent products who want a managed MCP runtime — thousands of pre-built tools, OAuth/IDP integration, and per-action authorization scoped to the intersection of agent and user permissions, wired into the agent SDK. Clawvisor is the control plane for governing agents you already have: it makes the task the unit of authorization — verifying intent, vaulting credentials agents never see, scoring risk, attributing cost, and keeping a replayable audit trail — in front of any agent, without rebuilding it on a new runtime.

Clawvisor vs Arcade, side by side

CapabilityClawvisoragent control planeArcade
Primary roleAgent control plane / governanceMCP runtime for building agents
Authorization modelPer task, per agent, per userPer-action scope (agent ∩ user)
Approval / human-in-the-loopBuilt-in, per task, with risk scoringVia app logic
Credential handlingVault; scoped short-lived handlesToken lifecycle, isolated from LLM
Audit trailReplayable, tied to authorizing taskOTel-compatible logs
Cost attributionPer task + approver
Works with existing agents YesBuild/run on Arcade runtime
Pre-built toolsMCP + first-class integrations7,000+ integrations
DeploymentSelf-host (open core) + cloudCloud, self-managed, on-prem, air-gapped
Entry pricingFree self-host / Free to startFree Hobby / $25 Growth + usage

Where each one is strongest

Clawvisor strengths

  • Task as the unit of trust: Approve a purpose plus the tools it needs once; containment, logging, cost, and credentials all follow.
  • Credentials agents never see: Real secrets stay in the vault; agents get scoped, short-lived handles swapped in at call time.
  • Approval + risk scoring: Every task is scored for blast radius; low-risk work flows through, high-risk waits for a human.
  • Drop-in in front of any agent: Runs as a gateway for Claude Code, MCP servers, and other agents without porting to a new runtime.
  • Open core, self-hostable: Read it, audit it, and run the gateway entirely inside your own network.

Arcade strengths

  • Pre-built tool catalog: Thousands of integrations and MCP tools optimized for agents to take action.
  • Per-action authorization: Runtime checks the intersection of what the agent and the end user are each allowed to do.
  • SDK-native: Drops into LangChain, OpenAI Agents, CrewAI, Vercel AI, and other frameworks.

Feature by feature

Authorization model

Arcade authorizes each action against scopes — the intersection of agent and user permissions. Clawvisor authorizes the task: it verifies the agent's stated intent against a 249-case eval suite, then grants exactly the tools that purpose needs.

Credentials

Both keep secrets away from the model. Arcade manages OAuth token lifecycle isolated from the LLM; Clawvisor vaults the real credential and hands the agent a scoped, short-lived handle it swaps in at call time.

Approval and risk

Arcade leaves human-in-the-loop to your application logic. Clawvisor builds approval in: each task is risk-scored, and high-blast-radius work is held for a human while low-risk work passes.

Integration model

Arcade is a runtime you build agents on, with a large tool catalog. Clawvisor is a gateway you put in front of agents you already run, so adoption doesn't require rewriting them.

Pricing compared

Clawvisor

Free to start

  • Self-hosted: free, open core
  • Cloud Solo: free to start
  • Cloud Org: custom (SSO, RBAC, retention)

Arcade

$25/mo + usage

  • Hobby: free
  • Growth: $25/mo + usage ($0.05/user challenge, $0.01/standard tool execution)
  • Enterprise: custom (audit logs, RBAC, SSO/SAML)

When to choose which

Choose Clawvisor

You already run agents like Claude Code or MCP servers and need to govern them — approve by task, vault credentials, score risk, and keep a full audit trail — without porting to a new runtime.

Choose Arcade

You're building a multi-user agent product from scratch and want a managed runtime with a large pre-built tool catalog and per-action OAuth baked into the SDK.

Frequently asked

Is Clawvisor better than Arcade?

Clawvisor and Arcade solve different problems. Clawvisor is a control plane that governs agents you already run, using the task as the unit of authorization. Arcade is a runtime developers build multi-user agents on, with a large pre-built tool catalog and per-action authorization.

What is the difference between Clawvisor and Arcade?

Arcade authorizes each action against agent and user scopes inside a runtime you build on. Clawvisor authorizes the whole task — verifying intent, vaulting credentials, scoring risk, and logging every call — at a gateway in front of any existing agent.

Is Clawvisor cheaper than Arcade?

Both start free. Clawvisor's core gateway is open source and free to self-host; its cloud is free to start. Arcade's Hobby tier is free, and its Growth tier is $25 per month plus usage-based fees for user challenges and tool executions.

Can Clawvisor replace Arcade?

Clawvisor can replace Arcade's authorization and audit role for agents you already run, but it does not provide Arcade's catalog of thousands of pre-built tools or its agent-building runtime. Teams building an agent product on Arcade may run Clawvisor as the governance layer in front of it.

Who should use Arcade instead of Clawvisor?

Developers building a new multi-user agent product who want a managed runtime, thousands of pre-built tools, and per-action OAuth authorization wired directly into their agent SDK should use Arcade.

See why teams pick Clawvisor over Arcade

Put a gateway in front of your agents in minutes. Free to start, open core, self-hostable.