Carrydesk vs Clocknext MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Carrydesk and Clocknext 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?

C

Choose Carrydesk when:

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

Explore Carrydesk Details

Choose Clocknext MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Finance & Fintech domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: clocknext_whoami, clocknext_list_models, clocknext_add_model.

Explore Clocknext MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	C Carrydesk Finance & Fintech	Clocknext MCP Finance & Fintech
Summary	Funding-carry rankings for Hyperliquid perps, metered per call in USDC via x402.	Meter usage and manage usage-based billing from AI tools via the ClockNext API.
Category & Scope	Finance & Fintech	Finance & Fintech
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": {
    "carrydesk": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "--from"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-191": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons