How six vendors enforce coding agent policy: endpoint, IDE, hook or guidance

Why the model matters

The same words, "govern coding agents", hide different designs. Where a control runs decides which agents it covers, what it can stop and whether a developer can switch it off. This note compares the six vendors in our ranking that describe controls on coding agents on their own pages. GitHub's built-in checks on its own Copilot coding agent and Aikido Security's IDE plugin are covered elsewhere on the site.

Model 1: the developer endpoint

Legit Security VibeGuard 2.0. Launched on 3 August 2026, it discovers coding agents on the developer endpoint and adds dangerous operation blocking, command monitoring and enforcement by custom or built-in policy, MCP security, skill discovery and anti-tampering. Legit names Claude Code, Cursor and GitHub Copilot in the announcement; the VibeGuard page also lists Windsurf, Amazon CodeWhisperer and MCP server based assistants, and approve or block decisions for discovered assistants, models and MCP servers. Codex: supported, per Legit (confirmed to the publisher in October 2026).

The strength of the endpoint model is breadth: one control can see several agents. Anti-tampering addresses the obvious weakness, a developer turning the control off.

Model 2: across the development lifecycle, by subscription

Snyk Evo Agentic Development Security. It discovers MCP servers, skills and tools and can evaluate, steer or block risky agent activity, naming Claude, Cursor, Codex, Windsurf, Antigravity, Kiro and Qodo. Snyk describes securing code at inception inside agents. It requires an Enterprise Platform Subscription.

Endor Labs AURI. It inventories coding agents, models, MCP servers and skills and applies policy at the moment of action. Endor Labs' MCP server installs into Cursor, Claude Code, VS Code with GitHub Copilot, Codex and Antigravity.

Model 3: the IDE

Cycode. Its IDE guardrails intercept secrets, file context, prompts and tool calls before they reach AI services, with MCP enforcement. The AI-BOM tracks rule files such as .cursorrules and .windsurfrules, MCP servers and AI API keys, with provenance. Cycode's AI Guardrails launched on 17 February 2026 with Cursor and Claude Code supported.

Model 4: hooks inside the agent

Semgrep Guardian. It runs as an MCP server, uses hooks on every file write and adds skills, in Claude Code, Cursor and Windsurf, blocking malicious dependencies, hardcoded credentials and vulnerable patterns. Claude Code's own documentation shows why hooks are precise: a PreToolUse hook can block a tool call before it runs. The pages we read show no org-wide inventory of agents or MCP servers.

Model 5: guidance before code exists

OX Security VibeSec. It analyzes the developer's prompt and sends security guidance to the agent before code is generated, supporting Claude Code, Cursor, Kiro and VS Code with Copilot. Dependency Vetting, announced on 9 September 2026, adds an enforcement step: it inspects each package install an AI agent attempts and blocks known-malicious packages.

Side by side

The table reflects the vendors' own descriptions on pages read on 27 September 2026; it does not measure how well any control works.

What to ask

Ask every vendor the same three questions: which agents does the control cover today, by name; what exactly does it block, as opposed to log or advise; and what happens when a developer disables it. The answers usually tell you which model the product follows, whatever the marketing calls it.