Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Bounded Tools MCP vs Site MCP
In-depth architectural comparison of the Bounded Tools MCP and Site 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
Bounded Tools MCP
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 27/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Site MCP
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 27/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Bounded Tools MCP if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Site MCP if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
B
Choose Bounded Tools 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).
S
Choose Site 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).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Bounded Tools MCP Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Site MCP Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
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).
Bounded Tools MCP Configuration
Site MCP Configuration