Compare

Cerbos vs Descope

Descope scores higher on the AgentReady, 61/100 against 46/100. They differ on 7 of the 41 signals. Which ones decides whether an agent can adopt them without a person watching.

What each one is

Cerbos. Authorization management platform for applications, APIs, AI agents, MCP servers, services, and workloads.

Descope. Descope is a passwordless authentication and user management service designed for developers.

Where Descope is ahead

Descope passes clear canonical domain, and Cerbos does not. That is discover, whether an agent can find the product at all without being told it exists.

It also holds understand: authentication documented. Cerbos misses it.

And on adopt, self-service signup, no mandatory sales call, agent-compatible signup flow, fast time to first request and cli available. Cerbos misses those.

What neither does

Both fail structured api reference, openapi / spec quality, pricing understandable, request examples provided, response examples provided, errors and status codes documented, limits / constraints documented, programmatic credential creation, free trial or free allowance, structured, predictable output, machine-readable errors, retry behavior documented, idempotency support, rate-limit behavior predictable, agent compatibility verified. If your agent needs any of those, you will be building it yourself either way.

Score, pillar by pillar

The AgentReady splits into four pillars, scored separately, because a product can be easy to find and still impossible to adopt.

Discover. Descope leads 100 to 93. Cerbos misses clear canonical domain; Descope misses nothing.

Understand. Descope leads 23 to 15. Cerbos misses structured api reference, openapi / spec quality, authentication documented, pricing understandable, request examples provided, response examples provided, errors and status codes documented, limits / constraints documented; Descope misses structured api reference, openapi / spec quality, pricing understandable, request examples provided, response examples provided, errors and status codes documented, limits / constraints documented.

Adopt is whether an agent can get a key and make its first successful call without a human in the loop. Descope leads 85 to 40. Cerbos misses self-service signup, no mandatory sales call, agent-compatible signup flow, programmatic credential creation, free trial or free allowance, fast time to first request, cli available; Descope misses programmatic credential creation, free trial or free allowance.

Operate. Both sit at 35/100 here. Cerbos misses structured, predictable output, machine-readable errors, retry behavior documented, idempotency support, rate-limit behavior predictable, agent compatibility verified; Descope misses structured, predictable output, machine-readable errors, retry behavior documented, idempotency support, rate-limit behavior predictable, agent compatibility verified.

Pricing

Cerbos does not publish a machine-readable starting price. Descope does not publish one.

Signal by signal

Which to pick

Descope clears more of the signals an agent needs, so it is the safer default for unattended use. Full profiles: Cerbos and Descope. Alternatives to each: Cerbos, Descope.

An agent can fetch this as data: POST /v1/compare {"slugs": ["cerbos", "descope"]}