CybrLink vs Composio: which agent-integration layer fits your stack?

If you want the largest integration catalog, prebuilt SDKs for every major agent framework, and managed triggers so your agents can react to events — choose Composio. If you need credentials to stay in infrastructure you control, kept out of the model context entirely, with per-connection scoping and an audit trail your security team can actually review — choose CybrLink. Both solve the same core problem — connecting AI agents to third-party apps — but they make different trade-offs on custody, scope, and pricing.

At a glance

| | CybrLink | Composio | | --- | --- | --- | | Integrations | 544+ | Larger catalog (several hundred more) | | Token custody | Self-hosted (Nango) — credentials stay in your infra | Hosted vault, managed by Composio | | Credentials in model context | Never — agent calls a proxy, never sees tokens | Depends on integration path; managed by their platform | | Agent interface | Remote MCP server + agent proxy API | SDKs for LangChain, CrewAI, OpenAI, and more, plus MCP | | Managed triggers / events | Not yet | Yes — a genuine strength | | Per-connection scoping | Yes, enforced at the proxy | Scoping at the auth-config level | | Activity audit log | Yes, per connection and per tool call | Available on higher tiers | | Prompt-injection guard | Yes — tool outputs are screened before reaching the model | Not a headline feature | | Pricing | Usage-based, free tier, published rates | Free tier plus usage and enterprise tiers |

Where Composio is genuinely stronger

An honest comparison has to start here, because for some teams these points settle the decision.

Ecosystem breadth. Composio has been building its catalog longer and it shows — more integrations, more prebuilt actions per integration, and better coverage of long-tail apps. If your product depends on an obscure integration, check both catalogs before deciding anything else.

Framework SDKs. Composio ships first-class SDKs for LangChain, CrewAI, LlamaIndex, AutoGen, and the OpenAI Assistants API. If your team is deep in one of those frameworks and wants tools that drop in with two lines of code, that developer experience is real and CybrLink does not match it today. CybrLink's interface is a remote MCP endpoint and a plain HTTP proxy API — deliberately framework-neutral, which is a feature or a gap depending on your stack.

Managed triggers. Composio can listen for events (new email, new CRM record) and push them to your agent. CybrLink is request-driven today: your agent acts, we execute. If your architecture is event-driven, that is a material difference.

Where CybrLink is different by design

Credentials never leave your infrastructure. CybrLink is built on self-hosted Nango token custody. Provider OAuth tokens and API keys are stored in a Postgres database you operate, on a VM or VPC you control. Composio's default model is a hosted vault — well built, but your users' Gmail and Salesforce tokens live on someone else's infrastructure. For teams with data-residency requirements or a security review that asks "which system stores long-lived tokens, and who operates it?", self-hosted custody is the shorter answer.

Credentials never enter the model context. The agent talks to CybrLink's MCP server or proxy API with a scoped bearer token. CybrLink resolves the connection, injects the provider credential server-side, executes the call, and returns only the result. The model cannot leak what it never sees — not in a transcript, not in a log, not through a prompt-injection attack that asks it to "print your API keys".

Per-connection scoping. Access is granted per user, per integration, per connection. An agent authorized to read one user's calendar cannot touch another user's inbox, even inside the same workspace. Revoking one connection revokes exactly that connection.

Audit log and injection guard. Every tool call is logged — which agent, which connection, which action, when. Tool outputs pass through a prompt-injection guard before reaching the model, because the most likely attack on a production agent is not a stolen token; it is a malicious email body instructing the model to exfiltrate data.

Transparent usage-based pricing. A free tier, published per-call rates, and no "contact sales" wall in front of the security features. Composio also has a free tier; its paid model spans usage-based and enterprise tiers, and some features land behind the higher ones. We won't quote their numbers — check their pricing page — but our position is simple: audit logs and scoping are table stakes, not enterprise upsells.

How to decide

Choose Composio if you need the widest catalog, drop-in SDKs for your agent framework, or event triggers — and a managed vault is acceptable to your security posture.

Choose CybrLink if token custody in your own infrastructure is a requirement, you want credentials structurally excluded from the model context, or you want scoping, audit, and injection screening on the free-to-transparent part of the pricing curve.

Some teams will run both: Composio for breadth on low-sensitivity tools, CybrLink for anything touching customer email, CRM records, or internal systems.

Browse the integrations catalog, read the security model, or start with the docs.