Archstone vs EvoBurrow MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Archstone and EvoBurrow MCP MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose Archstone when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Archstone Details

Choose EvoBurrow MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore EvoBurrow MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Archstone Developer Tools	EvoBurrow MCP Developer Tools
Summary	Compile your own business capabilities from declarative YAML and serve them as MCP tools.	Unofficial guarded A1 Evo AcoustiX, REW, and Denon/Marantz calibration tools.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "archstone": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "npm"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "evoburrow-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "evoburrow-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons