Gram vs Toolhouse
A side-by-side comparison of Gram and Toolhouse, two MCP tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
Gram
MCPBuild, curate, and host Model Context Protocol servers from your APIs or TypeScript.
View GramAt a glance
| Attribute | Gram | Toolhouse |
|---|---|---|
| Category | MCP | MCP |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License (differs) | Open core | Proprietary |
| Deployment (differs) | Hybrid | Cloud |
| Platforms (differs) | Web, CLI, API | Web, API, CLI |
| Model support (differs) | Model-agnostic | Multi-model |
| Vendor (differs) | Speakeasy | Toolhouse |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Gram
Curates and composes business-level tools from your OpenAPI or TypeScript instead of exposing raw API endpoints, so agents get cleaner toolsets.
- Open source (AGPL-3.0)
- Hosted MCP servers, no infra
- OpenAPI and TypeScript sources
- Built-in OAuth 2.1 proxy
- Tool curation, not raw APIs
- Still in public beta
- Usage-based costs at scale
- Tied to Speakeasy ecosystem
- Newer, smaller community
Toolhouse
Bundles the agent runtime and MCP tooling behind one API, so you skip wiring the infrastructure together yourself.
- Deploy agents as APIs in one command
- 1,000+ MCP tool integrations built in
- Built-in RAG, memory, and code execution
- Free tier includes OpenAI model usage
- Free Sandbox capped at 50 agent runs/month
- Vendor-hosted; less control than self-hosting
- Younger platform with a smaller ecosystem
When to pick which
Toolhouse leans on App / agent deployment as a headline capability; Gram treats it as secondary.
- App / agent deployment (primary capability)
They also differ on:
- License
- Open core · Proprietary
- Deployment
- Hybrid · Cloud
Their capability lists differ in recorded depth — compare the full lists above before deciding.