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.

DimensionMCP Local RAGSearch locally, retrieve below the surface.MartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS61 / 100 · C79 / 100 · B
Reliability8 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions14 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance10 / 2016 / 20
Documentation16 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience13 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • Developers who need local execution and privacy
  • Single-user environments searching code, technical specifications, and internal documents
  • Users who want a lightweight RAG workflow through MCP or the 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
  • Deployments requiring multi-user access, authentication, or access control
  • Cloud-scale retrieval or scenarios prioritizing higher cloud-model accuracy
  • Workflows requiring Excel, PowerPoint, or standalone image search
  • 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 supported files under configured document roots
  • Write the LanceDB database under DB_PATH
  • Write local Transformers.js model caches under CACHE_DIR
  • Access the network on first use to download models; cached models can then run offline
  • 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 server is designed for single-user local access and provides no multi-user authentication or access control
  • Captions generated in PDF visual mode may contain attacker-controlled text; downstream models should treat retrieved content as untrusted data
  • Changing the embedding model, device, or dtype requires deleting the database and re-ingesting to avoid degraded search quality
  • Ingestion, deletion, and synchronization against one DB_PATH should be limited to a single writer process
  • 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 clientsCursor, Codex, Claude CodeClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools90