M
MCP Directory CURATED DIRECTORY
911 MCP servers indexed
中文
← Back to directory
COMPARE UP TO 4 SERVERS

Compare MCP servers

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

DimensionCraft AgentsAn open-source, document-centric multi-agent workspace with Claude and MCP integration.MartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS44 / 100 · D79 / 100 · B
Reliability3 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions10 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance10 / 2016 / 20
Documentation12 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience9 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • Claude users who prefer a more document- or session-centric workflow
  • Developers who want to connect various sources and MCP servers within a desktop GUI
  • Users who want to run agents on a headless server and access via CLI
  • 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 who prefer a pure CLI workflow without a desktop interface
  • Users who do not need document-centric or multi-session management
  • Users who require official Anthropic support (this is a third-party build)
  • 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
  • User can choose permission modes: Explore (read-only), Ask to Edit, Auto (allow all)
  • User can connect third-party sources requiring authorization or API keys
  • Credentials are stored encrypted with AES-256-GCM
  • 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
  • Third-party sources may require sensitive credentials, posing leakage risk
  • Local MCP servers run as subprocesses protected by environment variable filtering, but misconfiguration could lead to credential exposure
  • As a non-official tool, may lack timely stability or security updates
  • 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 DesktopClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools00