docs: position sudo-proxy against MCP Registry alternatives

[cuihtlauac]

Positions sudo-proxy against the servers on registry.modelcontextprotocol.io that show up for sudo, root, privilege, ssh, and command.

README

• Add a one-sentence market position under the title (no "only": "An MCP server that lets an agent run privileged, mutating commands — locally or over SSH — with a human keypress required on every one and no credential ever stored.").
• Add a Features and non-features section. The non-features are the real differentiators and each rebuts a registry alternative's weak spot without naming any (no stored credentials, no unattended execution, not a sandbox, not a policy engine, not read-only, no hosted service, not a general remote shell).

docs/comparison.md

• Add a MCP Registry alternatives section (ToC entry + body):
  • mcp-sudo — the one head-to-head competitor (caches an encrypted sudo password and auto-executes); includes a side-by-side table.
  • agent-sudo-mcp — a policy gateway that gates other tools, not an executor.
  • SSH command executors — reach without a per-command gate.
  • Read-only SSH diagnostics — safety by refusing to mutate.
  • Arbitrary command runners — the "why not the Bash tool" case; source of the ByteDance entry verified (npm @agent-infra/mcp-server-commands, in the UI-TARS-desktop monorepo).
  • Generic approval gates — consent layers that don't execute.

Each entry cites the registry identifier and links the verified repo/site.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code