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.

DimensionLat MCP ServerA knowledge graph for your codebase, written in markdownMartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS62 / 100 · C79 / 100 · B
Reliability10 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions12 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance14 / 2016 / 20
Documentation15 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience11 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • Teams and individual developers who want a maintainable knowledge graph for their codebase
  • Users of coding agents who want them to work from stable, searchable context
  • Projects that treat markdown as the documentation medium and want docs and source to stay in sync
  • Environments that need offline semantic search (the default local WASM embedding model)
  • 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
  • Small projects that only need a single flat AGENTS.md file (limited benefit from a knowledge graph)
  • Teams that do not use coding agents and do not plan to maintain markdown domain docs
  • Users expecting an out-of-the-box hosted service or a cloud multi-user documentation platform
  • Projects unwilling to add // @lat: annotations to source code
  • 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/write access to the project repository (lat init creates the lat.md/ directory and configures coding agents' hooks and instructions)
  • Read access to API keys when hosted embeddings are configured: the LAT_LLM_KEY environment variable, a file named by LAT_LLM_KEY_FILE, or a shell command named by LAT_LLM_KEY_HELPER
  • Write access to local index and config (lat reindex and lat config involve local caches and a config file)
  • 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
  • If hosted embeddings are used with an API key (OpenAI or Vercel AI Gateway), relevant text may be sent to an external service; the default local model makes no network requests
  • LAT_LLM_KEY_HELPER executes a shell command to print the key; if that variable is set from an untrusted source it poses a command execution risk
  • A key file with weak permissions could be read by other local processes
  • A knowledge graph that is not kept up to date with lat check can drift from the actual code and mislead agents
  • lat init modifies coding agents' hooks and instructions, which may affect existing workflows
  • 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, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools00