Vendor MCP servers are creating an AI governance gap

Most companies connect AI to their systems through each vendor’s own MCP server, because it’s the fastest path. But every server has its own permission rules, most ship with more access than the job needs, and the logs live inside each vendor where no one can see across them. What you’ll learn: ▸ The tradeoffs between a vendor’s MCP server and a custom one ▸ How vendor MCPs can cost you in both speed and tokens ▸ Why vendor MCP servers are often over-permissioned by default ▸ Why per-vendor logs don’t give you an audit trail when an ERP record just says “integration user” on a shared key ▸ How shadow AI shows up in practice: teams spinning up their own MCP servers that IT never approved and doesn’t know exist ▸ The three questions your CIO and CISO need answered after an AI-driven change, and why most MCP setups can’t answer any of them CHAPTERS 00:00 Why use Celigo’s MCP server when every vendor ships its own? 00:28 Vendor vs. custom MCP 01:10 Four vendor MCP calls vs. one Customer 360 tool 02:07 Connectivity is half the MCP problem. Governance is where IT loses sleep 03:01 Problem 1: most vendor MCP servers are over-permissioned 03:23 Problem 2: no central audit trail 03:43 Problem 3: shadow AI and MCP servers IT never approved 05:32 Too much access, rising token spend Every new MCP connection is one more set of permissions, logs, and costs for IT to manage. Govern them in one place, or you won’t be able to answer who changed what. 🚀 Never miss Celigo Sessions: https://www.celigo.com/webinar_series/celigo-sessions/ 👉 Get a demo: https://www.celigo.com/request-a-demo/ 🔎 Learn more: https://www.celigo.com/platform/mcp-management/ #Celigo #MCPServer #ModelContextProtocol #AIGovernance #ShadowAI #EnterpriseAI #ITLeadership #iPaaS #IntegrationPlatform #NetSuite