← Back to directory
COMPARE UP TO 4 SERVERS

Compare MCP servers

Compare scores, permissions, risks, and fit in one decision-focused table.

DimensionCodebase MemoryA codebase knowledge graph for AI coding agents.MartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS52 / 100 · D79 / 100 · B
Reliability8 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions12 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance10 / 2016 / 20
Documentation13 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience9 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • AI coding agents that need local code intelligence.
  • Teams requiring cross-file call resolution, architecture analysis, or incremental indexing.
  • Users who prefer a pure-C stdio server with local persistent storage.
  • Engineering teams scaling AI coding agents while controlling spend
  • Platform teams that need auditable, rollback-aware agent execution records
  • Organizations using multiple agents (Claude, Codex, Gemini) under one governed flow
Not for
  • Users requiring a built-in large language model or cloud-hosted code analysis.
  • Users unable to build from source or provide a C/C++ build environment.
  • Clients requiring SSE or streamable-http transport.
  • Developers who just want a simple code-completion helper without run governance
  • Teams unwilling to accept local JSONL run records with HMAC signing
  • Environments without a supported adapter (Claude/Codex/Gemini CLIs, direct provider, or verifier-only)
Required permissions
  • Read access to the repositories and Git changes being indexed.
  • Local write access for the SQLite graph database and configuration in the cache directory.
  • When installing or configuring supported agents, write access to agent configuration, instruction files, skills, and hooks.
  • Write access to Architecture Decision Records when managing ADRs.
  • Read/write access to the configured repo root (writable scope restrictable via --allow-path/--deny-path)
  • Ability to invoke the chosen agent CLI (Claude/Codex/Gemini, etc.) and its underlying model account
  • Local disk writes for run records, receipts, and share outputs (share/run-receipt., etc.)
  • Execution of user-configured verifier commands (e.g. npm test)
Risks and side effects
  • The tool reads the codebase and may write to agent configuration files.
  • The fork has no prebuilt binaries; building compiles many vendored grammars.
  • Do not run the binary's update subcommand because it pulls the official upstream release and overwrites the integrated build.
  • Deleting a project or local cache removes the corresponding graph data, but not the source code.
  • Verifier commands are executed; poorly chosen verifier commands carry security risk despite preflight policy checks
  • Cost and token figures may be estimates (labeled with provenance) and should not be treated as settled accounting
  • Receipt integrity must be verified before use as trustworthy evidence; missing rollback evidence is flagged as EVIDENCE_BOUNDARY
  • Policy defaults come from martin.config.yaml and can be overridden by CLI flags; misconfiguration can loosen safety boundaries
Supported clientsClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Zed, OpenCode, Antigravity, Aider, KiloCode, VS Code, OpenClaw, KiroClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools150