Auvik vs ChirpStack

In-depth architectural comparison of the Auvik and ChirpStack 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 Auvik 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 Auvik Details

Choose ChirpStack 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 ChirpStack Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Auvik Developer Tools	ChirpStack Developer Tools
Summary	MCP server for the Auvik network monitoring API — devices, alerts, statistics, billing.	Manage and live-debug LoRaWAN devices on a ChirpStack v4 network server over its gRPC API
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": {
    "auvik": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "auvik"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "chirpstack": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "chirpstack-mcp-server"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons