Builderforce vs Image Puma

In-depth architectural comparison of the Builderforce and Image Puma 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 Builderforce 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 Builderforce Details

I

Choose Image Puma 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 Image Puma Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Builderforce Developer Tools	I Image Puma Developer Tools
Summary	Run tickets, boards, OKRs and cloud coding agents in your Builderforce workspace	Plan and run local batch image preparation with explicit confirmation before writing files.
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": {
    "builderforce": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "wrangler"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "image-puma": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "image-puma"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons