Onform vs Skrun

Onform is an MCP-native form builder — the first form tool designed around MCP as its primary interface rather than a visual drag-and-drop UI. You describe the form you want to Claude or Cursor, and Onform's MCP server creates it, adds fields, sets validation rules, configures submissions, and returns a live URL. No dashboard, no templates, no GUI required. The platform handles all the backend infrastructure: submission storage, email notifications, spam filtering, and export to CSV or webhook. Each form has a public URL and an admin API. Updating a form is as simple as telling your agent what to change. Onform is built for developers who create forms as part of larger agent workflows — onboarding flows, data collection pipelines, feedback loops — where manually clicking through a SaaS dashboard breaks the automation chain. It supports multi-step forms, conditional logic, file uploads, and custom branding via MCP tool parameters.

Skrun is an open-source tool that wraps agentic skills — the discrete, reusable capabilities you build for AI agents (web search, data extraction, file transformation, API calls) — into deployable REST APIs with a single command. The idea is that skills you build for one agent context shouldn't be locked to that agent's runtime. With Skrun, you define a skill once with a standard function signature, and get a hosted endpoint with automatic request validation, retry logic, rate limiting, and an OpenAPI spec generated automatically. The project addresses a real architectural tension in the current AI tools ecosystem: agent skills are written in a dozen different formats (LangChain tools, MCP tools, function call JSON, OpenAI tool specs) and are essentially stranded assets — they only work within their specific orchestration framework. Skrun normalizes this by wrapping any skill definition format and exposing it as a framework-agnostic HTTP endpoint that any agent or pipeline can call. This appeared on Hacker News with a small but thoughtful discussion focused on the "skills as microservices" architectural pattern. Critics noted that adding HTTP round-trips to every tool call introduces latency; proponents argued that the composability and reusability benefits outweigh the cost. The early version focuses on stateless skills; stateful/conversational skill deployment is on the roadmap.