--- title: "caveman vs mcpproxy-go" type: "comparison" canonical_url: "https://www.graphcanon.com/compare/juliusbrussee-caveman-vs-smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go" tools: ["juliusbrussee-caveman", "smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go"] --- # caveman vs mcpproxy-go *GraphCanon updated Jul 12, 2026* ## Verdict Pick caveman when caveman is primarily JavaScript; mcpproxy-go is Go; pick mcpproxy-go when mcpproxy-go is primarily Go; caveman is JavaScript. [caveman](https://caveman.so/) reports 88k GitHub stars, 5.1k forks, and 392 open issues, last pushed Jul 3, 2026. [mcpproxy-go](https://mcpproxy.app) has 285 stars, 36 forks, and 14 open issues, last pushed Jul 11, 2026. Figures are from public GitHub metadata via [caveman's repository](https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman) and [mcpproxy-go's repository](https://github.com/smart-mcp-proxy/mcpproxy-go). | | [caveman](/tools/juliusbrussee-caveman.md) | [mcpproxy-go](/tools/smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go.md) | | --- | --- | --- | | Tagline | Reduce token usage with concise 'caveman'-style prompts. | Supercharge AI Agents, Safely | | Stars | 87,950 | 285 | | Forks | 5,052 | 36 | | Open issues | 392 | 14 | | Language | JavaScript | Go | | Adopt for | The **caveman** tool is designed for developers and AI users who aim to optimize their token usage through the generation of more concise prompts, thereby potentially reducing costs and improving efficiency. However, it犺 | - | | Persona | - | - | | Runtime | - | - | | License | MIT | MIT | | Categories | Developer Tools, LLM Frameworks | AI Agents, Developer Tools, LLM Frameworks | ## Trust and health _Sourced signals - not a safety guarantee. No winner column._ | | [caveman](/tools/juliusbrussee-caveman.md) | [mcpproxy-go](/tools/smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go.md) | | --- | --- | --- | | Maintenance | Active (82%) | Very active (96%) | | Days since push | 7d | 0d | | Open issues (now) | 392 | 14 | | Owner type | User | Organization | | Security scan | No lockfile | No criticals | | Full report | [trust report](/tools/juliusbrussee-caveman/trust.md) | [trust report](/tools/smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go/trust.md) | ## Decision facts: caveman - **Adopt for:** The **caveman** tool is designed for developers and AI users who aim to optimize their token usage through the generation of more concise prompts, thereby potentially reducing costs and improving efficiency. However, it犺 ## Choose when ### Choose caveman if… - caveman is primarily JavaScript; mcpproxy-go is Go. - Tags unique to caveman: anthropic, caveman, claude-code, prompt-engineering. - When you need to significantly cut down on token usage in AI interactions, up to 65%, without losing essential information content. ### Choose mcpproxy-go if… - mcpproxy-go is primarily Go; caveman is JavaScript. - Tags unique to mcpproxy-go: ai-agents, audit-logging, bm25, cli. - Also covers AI Agents. - mcpproxy-go ships Docker support for self-hosted deployment. ## When NOT to use caveman - When requiring complex and detailed prompts that necessitate more nuanced expression beyond simple, 'caveman'-style sentences. - For situations where adherence to formal or specific linguistic structures is mandatory for the task's success. ## When NOT to use mcpproxy-go - AI Agents: Don't use an agent loop when a deterministic workflow would do; agents add latency, cost, and non-determinism. - Developer Tools: A gateway is overkill when you're pinned to a single provider and model. - LLM Frameworks: Avoid a framework for a single prompt-and-retrieve call; the abstraction can cost more than it saves. ## Common questions ### What is the difference between caveman and mcpproxy-go? caveman: Reduce token usage with concise 'caveman'-style prompts.. mcpproxy-go: Supercharge AI Agents, Safely. See the comparison table for live GitHub stats and shared categories. ### When should I choose caveman over mcpproxy-go? Choose caveman over mcpproxy-go when caveman is primarily JavaScript; mcpproxy-go is Go; Tags unique to caveman: anthropic, caveman, claude-code, prompt-engineering; When you need to significantly cut down on token usage in AI interactions, up to 65%, without losing essential information content. ### When should I choose mcpproxy-go over caveman? Choose mcpproxy-go over caveman when mcpproxy-go is primarily Go; caveman is JavaScript; Tags unique to mcpproxy-go: ai-agents, audit-logging, bm25, cli; Also covers AI Agents; mcpproxy-go ships Docker support for self-hosted deployment. ### When should I avoid caveman? When requiring complex and detailed prompts that necessitate more nuanced expression beyond simple, 'caveman'-style sentences. For situations where adherence to formal or specific linguistic structures is mandatory for the task's success. ### When should I avoid mcpproxy-go? AI Agents: Don't use an agent loop when a deterministic workflow would do; agents add latency, cost, and non-determinism. Developer Tools: A gateway is overkill when you're pinned to a single provider and model. LLM Frameworks: Avoid a framework for a single prompt-and-retrieve call; the abstraction can cost more than it saves. ### Is caveman or mcpproxy-go more popular on GitHub? caveman has more GitHub stars (87,950 vs 285). Stars measure visibility, not whether either tool fits your constraints. ### Are caveman and mcpproxy-go open source? Yes - both are open-source projects on GitHub (caveman: MIT, mcpproxy-go: MIT). ### Where can I find alternatives to caveman or mcpproxy-go? GraphCanon lists graph-backed alternatives at [caveman alternatives](/tools/juliusbrussee-caveman/alternatives) and [mcpproxy-go alternatives](/tools/smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go/alternatives) ([caveman markdown twin](/tools/juliusbrussee-caveman/alternatives.md), [mcpproxy-go markdown twin](/tools/smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go/alternatives.md)), ranked by typed relationship edges rather than popularity votes. ### Is there a machine-readable version of this comparison? Yes. The markdown twin at [this comparison](/compare/juliusbrussee-caveman-vs-smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go.md) mirrors this page for agents and LLM crawlers, with the same stats table and FAQ answers. ### Which is better maintained, caveman or mcpproxy-go? caveman: Active. mcpproxy-go: Very active. Compare maintenance labels, days since push, and release cadence in the trust section below - stars alone do not measure maintenance. ### Where are the full trust reports for caveman and mcpproxy-go? GraphCanon publishes per-repo trust reports with dated maintenance, provenance, and scan summaries: [caveman trust report](/tools/juliusbrussee-caveman/trust); [mcpproxy-go trust report](/tools/smart-mcp-proxy-mcpproxy-go/trust). --- **Machine-readable endpoints** - JSON: [`/api/graphcanon/graph?tool=juliusbrussee-caveman`](/api/graphcanon/graph?tool=juliusbrussee-caveman) - LLM index: [/llms.txt](/llms.txt) - Full corpus: [/llms-full.txt](/llms-full.txt) _GraphCanon - The knowledge graph for AI development. https://www.graphcanon.com/_