Blockfill vs Octocode MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Blockfill and Octocode 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?

B

Choose Blockfill when:

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

Explore Blockfill Details

Choose Octocode MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Version Control domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Free / Open Source).
• You have access to required keys: ENABLE_CLONE.
• Primary tools included: ghSearchCode, ghGetFileContent, ghViewRepoStructure.

Explore Octocode MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B Blockfill Version Control	Octocode MCP bgauryy Version Control
Summary	Local-first crypto perp/spot execution (TWAP/maker) across 11 venues; keys stay on your machine.	AI-powered developer assistant that enables advanced research, analysis and discovery across GitHub and NPM realms in realtime.
Category & Scope	Version Control	Version Control

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": {
    "blockfill": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "blockfill"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bgauryy-octocode-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "octocode"
      ],
      "env": {
        "ENABLE_CLONE": "YOUR_ENABLE_CLONE_HERE"
      }
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons