Zero overhead.
20 of 21 chaos attacks survived.
zeromcp vs ModelContextProtocol — side by side.
This is a hello world
A builder pattern, anonymous types for schema, and transport setup. 8 lines of ceremony before your tool does anything.
var server = new McpServerBuilder()
.WithName("test")
.WithTool("hello", "Say hello",
new { name = new { type = "string" } },
async (args) =>
$"Hello, {args["name"]}!")
.Build();
await server.RunStdioAsync(); This is the whole server
No builder pattern. No anonymous types. No McpServerBuilder.
Register a lambda and serve.
var server = new Server();
server.Tool("hello", new Tool {
Description = "Say hello",
Input = new Input()
.Required("name", "string"),
Execute = (args, ctx) =>
$"Hello, {args["name"]}!"
});
await server.ServeStdioAsync(); HTTP Performance — Head to Head
Same hello tool. Same methodology. 5-minute sustained load in Docker. ASP.NET for ZeroMCP, stdio proxy for the official SDK.
ZeroMCP on ASP.NET uses more CPU (1.47% vs 0.05%) due to the .NET runtime. But it serves 1.8x more requests.
ZeroMCP HTTP Frameworks
ZeroMCP embedded natively in C# frameworks. No proxy. No subprocess. 30-second sustained load.
What's different
- SandboxEnforced. Not advisory.
- CredentialsPer-directory. Not
Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable. - ProcessesOne. Not N.
- Hot reloadBuilt-in. Not restart.
- ComposabilityConnect remote MCP servers. Official SDK can't.
- TransportStreamable HTTP by default. Stdio too.
When to use the official SDK
ZeroMCP makes trade-offs. Here's what you give up.
ZeroMCP implements tools only. If you need MCP resources, prompts, or sampling, use the official SDK.
ZeroMCP uses a simplified registration API. If you prefer attribute-based tool definitions with typed parameters, use the official SDK.
The official SDK tracks every spec change immediately. ZeroMCP prioritizes stability over spec completeness.
The official SDK is maintained by the MCP specification team at Anthropic. ZeroMCP is maintained by the antidrift team (Reloop Labs, LLC).