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.

DimensionMisakaNet MCP ServerGit-backed failure memory for AI coding agents.MartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS52 / 100 · D79 / 100 · B
Reliability6 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions9 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance13 / 2016 / 20
Documentation13 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience11 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • AI coding agents that need failure-recovery knowledge during task execution
  • Developers who want public debugging knowledge managed with Git and Markdown
  • Users who prefer zero-dependency, database-free deployment
  • 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
  • A general-purpose memory system
  • An AI-agent runtime or framework
  • A vector database or RAG system
  • A skill marketplace
  • 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
  • Local stdio setup requires running Python 3 and accessing the MisakaNet source and lesson files
  • Remote MCP setup requires using the supplied Bearer token to access the remote endpoint
  • Contributing or submitting an intake report requires intentional submission of content
  • 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
  • Lessons are community-contributed; review and sandbox commands before executing them
  • A retrieved fix may not apply to the current environment
  • Remote use involves sending searches to the service and handling an access token
  • 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, Claude Code, CodexClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools00