Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Content Distribution MCP vs Email MCP
In-depth architectural comparison of the Content Distribution MCP and Email 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Content Distribution MCP
Communication · Local stdio
Quality: 56/100 (Good) | Auth: API Key required
Email MCP
Communication · Local stdio
Quality: 68/100 (Great) | Auth: other
Verdict Summary: Choose Content Distribution MCP if you need specialized Communication tools running via a local process. Choose Email MCP if your workspace requires Communication integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Content Distribution MCP when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Free / Open Source).
- Primary tools included: post_publish, post_schedule, post_drain.
Choose Email MCP when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: other (Free / Open Source).
- You have access to required keys:
MCP_EMAIL_ADDRESS, MCP_EMAIL_PASSWORD, MCP_EMAIL_IMAP_HOST, MCP_EMAIL_SMTP_HOST, EMAIL_ACCOUNTS. - Primary tools included: list_accounts, list_mailboxes, list_emails.
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Content Distribution MCP Tools (8)
post_publish
Publish one or more channel variants immediately. Side effects: makes external HTTP requests to each channel platform; writes publish state to the local YAML backend; requires valid credentials in the named profile. Idempotent on (content.id, channel) — re-running with the same IDs returns cached state without re-posting. Use post_publish for immediate-only delivery; use post_schedule when any variant needs a future schedule_at; use post_drain to flush a previously built queue.
post_schedule
Enqueue channel variants with schedule_at for future publishing; variants without schedule_at are published immediately. Side effects: writes entries to the local YAML schedule store; makes external HTTP requests for any immediately-published variants; requires credentials in the named profile. Idempotent on (content.id, channel). Use post_schedule when any variant needs a future publish time; use post_publish for all-immediate delivery; use post_drain to process the scheduled queue later.
post_drain
Fire all scheduled posts due at or before the given time boundary. Side effects: makes external HTTP requests for each due entry; writes results to the YAML backend. Idempotent — already-published (content.id, channel) pairs are skipped; no-op when no entries are due. Safe to call from cron. Use post_drain on a recurring schedule to flush the queue; use post_publish or post_schedule to add new content; use post_status to inspect results after drain runs.
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).
Content Distribution MCP Configuration
Email MCP Configuration
Frequently Asked Questions
More alternatives to Content Distribution MCPMore alternatives to Email MCPCommunication category hub