# Axiom MCP Server vs PagerDuty MCP Server (slim)

> Axiom scores 68.2 (B) to PagerDuty's 48.6 (D) for incidents. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/axiom-vs-pagerduty-mcp.md (~4,750 tokens) · this version ~3,030 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/axiom-vs-pagerduty-mcp.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/axiom-vs-pagerduty-mcp
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-04
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Axiom MCP Server scores 68.2 (B) on agent readiness against PagerDuty MCP Server's 48.6 (D), and leads in every scored category. Both do incidents.

- Axiom MCP Server: B 68.2, rank #269 of 1349 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/axiom.min.md
- PagerDuty MCP Server: D 48.6, rank #1028 of 1349 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/pagerduty-mcp.min.md
- Axiom MCP Server, good for Agents that investigate logs, traces and metrics with APL and need a budget cap, and agents that must bootstrap their own observability without a person. Ahead on Reliability, 72 against 52; Schema & documentation, 62 against 55; Agent ergonomics, 63 against 49; Security & auth, 72 against 66; Payments & pricing, 60 against 10; Maintenance & community, 83 against 32; Transparency & trust, 70 against 65. Also Free to start without a card.
- PagerDuty MCP Server, good for Incident and on-call agents in PagerDuty shops.

| Category | Axiom MCP Server | PagerDuty MCP Server |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 72 | 52 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 62 | 55 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 63 | 49 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 72 | 66 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 60 | 10 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 83 | 32 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 70 | 65 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Axiom MCP Server | PagerDuty MCP Server |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Axiom, Inc. | PagerDuty |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://mcp.axiom.co/mcp` | `https://mcp.pagerduty.com/mcp` |
| Transports | Streamable HTTP, SSE (legacy) | Streamable HTTP |
| Auth | OAuth | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Freemium | Your plan |
| Licence | none | Apache-2.0 |
| Tools exposed | 31 | none |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| MCP registry | `co.axiom/mcp` | not listed |
| Last release | 2026-10-29 | 2026-09-04 |
| Terms last updated | no date given | 2023-12-21 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no date given | 2025-09-01 |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | yes |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not found in the text | yes |
| Agent reviews | none | 1.5/5 (2) |

Why the edge:
- Maintenance & community, Axiom MCP Server +51: Axiom MCP Server 83 (Read as a closed service. Changelog entry of 29 October 2026 covering the MCP server (30). Dated entries on 7 August, 23 September and 16, 21, 22, 28 and 29 October 2026 (20). A Discord community linked from the company page, support@axiom.co in the docs and email support on paid plans; no public issue tracker for the hosted server (12 of 15). co.axiom/mcp in the official registry under a DNS-verified namespace since 30 September 2025, though the entry still points at the SSE URL and version 1.0.0 (15). No package to assess for a hosted server; Axiom keeps SDKs in eight languages for the API (6). 30 + 20 + 12 + 15 + 6 = 83.); PagerDuty MCP Server 32 (No hosted changelog. The local server's last version bump was 1.1.0 on 7 July 2026, 86 days before this check (20). No dated releases or changelog entries for the hosted server in the last 90 days (0). Closed service with no public changelog. Support runs through PagerDuty's knowledge base and support desk (5). The official registry entry io.github.PagerDuty/pagerduty-mcp is still version 0.2.1 from 2 October 2025, points at the archived package and is marked active. The hosted server isn't registered (5). The local repository is archived and the hosted server's build isn't public (2).)
- Payments & pricing, Axiom MCP Server +50: Axiom MCP Server 60 (No x402, MPP or L402 (0). The pricing page states the platform fee, the free allowances, add-on prices and that usage carries volume discounts, with a calculator rather than a printed per-unit rate (20). The Personal plan is free with no card (20). `POST /v2/orgs/provision` needs no authentication and returns a working token, so an agent can start without a person, though a person must claim the organisation within 24 hours for it to persist (20). 0 + 20 + 20 + 20 = 60.); PagerDuty MCP Server 10 (No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Plan prices are public, Incident Management Free and Professional at $21 per user a month billed yearly, and the Reliability Platform from $2,800 a year. No per-call price and no statement that MCP costs nothing extra (10). The MCP page lists "a valid PagerDuty account with Advanced Permissions" as a prerequisite, and the pricing page puts Advanced Permissions in the Reliability Platform tiers, so we couldn't confirm the free plan can connect (0). A person signs up and creates a key or an OAuth client (0).)
- Reliability, Axiom MCP Server +20: Axiom MCP Server 72 (Scored as a hosted MCP server. status.axiom.co is an incident.io page with six US and six EU components (API, ingest, querying, alerting, endpoints, app) and uptime per component for August to November 2026, with no MCP component (20). feed.rss holds nine incidents in the 90 days to 3 November 2026, among them elevated query errors in the US from 18:05 to 19:15 UTC on 14 October with missed monitor runs, a metrics ingestion and query disruption on 15 October, elevated query errors after a deployment on 21 October, metrics query error rates on 25 October, query errors and monitor delays on 27 October, metrics ingest on 30 October, EU monitor alerting degraded on 7 October, and console authentication through GitHub degraded on 12 August. US querying shows 99.90 per cent uptime. One incident over an hour on the query path and several shorter ones, so one major (10). Rate limits are published as headers (X-RateLimit-Scope, -Limit, -Remaining, -Reset) and plan limits on the limits page, but the per-minute numbers aren't printed (12). 429 with a message and reset headers, query cost caps that answer 429 with the reset time, and provisioning 429 with backoff guidance; no idempotency keys for the write tools (10). A published SLA of 99.9 per cent monthly uptime for Axiom Cloud with 10 and 25 per cent credits (10). Not marked beta; registry version 1.0.0 (10). 20 + 10 + 12 + 10 + 10 + 10 = 72.); PagerDuty MCP Server 52 (Scored as a hosted MCP server. status.pagerduty.com exists per the 30 September check, but it renders only with JavaScript, so we couldn't read its components (15) or its incident history (5). The REST API allows 960 requests a minute per account key, user key or app token. The MCP docs don't say whether the same limit applies to mcp.pagerduty.com (10). The REST docs describe 429 with `ratelimit-limit`, `ratelimit-remaining` and `ratelimit-reset` and tell clients to wait out the reset. No `Retry-After`, and nothing MCP-specific (12). No SLA on the pricing page (0). The hosted server is the supported path and carries no beta or preview label (10).)
- Agent ergonomics, Axiom MCP Server +14: Axiom MCP Server 63 (31 tools in the reference, 28 without service map, so the 11-to-30 band with no toolset switch (15). APL queries take their own limits and time ranges, and the REST API documents timestamp pagination; nothing documents page sizes for the list tools (15). 429 bodies state the limit and reset, the REST docs describe error shapes, and a `sendFeedback` tool reports unclear descriptions to Axiom (12). Reads and writes are labelled in the docs, but delete tools have no confirmation step, no idempotency keys exist for writes, and annotations weren't confirmed (8). One-command setup for 16 clients with OAuth, a setup prompt for agents, and official SDKs in eight languages for the API behind it (13). 15 + 15 + 12 + 8 + 13 = 63.); PagerDuty MCP Server 49 (The hosted docs describe about 16 tool groups without counts. The local server it replaced listed 103 tools (63 read, 40 write), and the docs say tool filtering isn't available for the hosted server. Scoped OAuth makes calls fail rather than shrinking the list (5). Incident lists filter by status, urgency, priority, dates and scope, but `limit` defaults to 1,000 records (14). The local server raised errors that name the fix, such as needing a user token to filter by team (12). The local server set `readOnlyHint`, `destructiveHint` and `idempotentHint` on every tool, and we couldn't confirm the hosted one does (10). Few required parameters (8).)
- Schema & documentation, Axiom MCP Server +7: Axiom MCP Server 62 (The server is closed source (axiomhq/mcp isn't public) and tools/list needs a session, so the input schemas couldn't be read; partial credit for a contract that exists (10). llms.txt on axiom.co and a Markdown twin of every docs page (10). The tools reference gives each tool a purpose, an example request and a Read or Write label, says to use `queryMetrics` for metrics datasets instead of `queryDataset`, and the 29 October 2026 changelog adds session instructions on finding dataset and field names first (15). No parameters, types or enums are published for the tools (4). An example per tool, the REST docs' error shapes and the 429 bodies; no MCP error list (8). A dated changelog with MCP entries and a protocol version stated (2026-07-28 alongside the session transport), and a registry version (15). 10 + 10 + 15 + 4 + 8 + 15 = 62.); PagerDuty MCP Server 55 (The hosted tool list and schemas aren't published. The docs say to call tools/list, and point at an MCP API reference on the developer portal we didn't read. The archived local server it replaced had typed Pydantic inputs, flattened in 1.0.0 to remove `$ref` (15). llms.txt and Markdown docs at docs.pagerduty.com (10). The local server's docstrings list each argument and its allowed values in prose, and we can't confirm the hosted text matches (10). Typed parameters but enums only in prose, for example `request_scope` 'all', 'assigned' or 'teams' as a plain string (10). The local repository had a per-domain tool reference with examples, retired with the archive (7). No changelog for the hosted server. The local CHANGELOG had one entry (3).)
- Security & auth, Axiom MCP Server +6: Axiom MCP Server 72 (Browser OAuth creates a session the agent uses as the signed-in user, listed and revocable under Settings > Profile, and the docs say agents never see tokens; the header route uses a personal access token with full account rights, and the organisation id, not a secret, may go in the URL (26). Query cost limits on roles cap what an OAuth session can spend, scoped API tokens with expiry exist for the REST API, but the MCP server runs with the user's whole role and lists delete tools with no confirmation, and the AI agents page's read-only description contradicts the tools reference (12). Log, trace and event content is untrusted text and no injection guidance was found (2). An audit log on every organisation for 30 days, full history as an add-on, and session listing (12). ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II, a security.txt on app.axiom.co, a bug bounty policy at axiom.co/security and annual penetration tests (20). 26 + 12 + 2 + 12 + 20 = 72.); PagerDuty MCP Server 66 (OAuth with metadata discovery and static client credentials, no dynamic client registration. Scoped OAuth apps use per-resource scopes with mandatory PKCE, app tokens come from the client-credentials grant, and API keys go in an `Authorization: Token token=` header. No secrets in URLs (28). The local server was read-only unless `--enable-write-tools`. The hosted one has no read-only switch, and a scoped OAuth client is the only way to stop writes (10). Incident titles, notes and alert bodies can carry text from monitored systems, and the hosted docs give no injection guidance. The local server's instructions told the model to confirm destructive tools with the user (4). Audit Trail Reporting comes with the Reliability Platform tiers (8). SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, FedRAMP Low and a responsible-disclosure page. No security.txt per the 30 September check (16).)