Byteplant MCP vs MCP Enrichment

In-depth architectural comparison of the Byteplant MCP and MCP Enrichment 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 Byteplant MCP when:

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

Explore Byteplant MCP Details

Choose MCP Enrichment when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore MCP Enrichment Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B Byteplant MCP Communication	MCP Enrichment Communication
Summary	An MCP server that provides Email, Phone and Address Validation Services from Byteplant	Multi-source entity enrichment: company data, contacts, email verification, and phone validation
Category & Scope	Communication	Communication
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": {
    "byteplant-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "byteplant-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-enrichment": {
      "url": "https://modelcontextprotocol.io/"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons