Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Changeflow vs Repology MCP Server
In-depth architectural comparison of the Changeflow and Repology MCP Server 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
Changeflow
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 47/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Repology MCP Server
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 39/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Changeflow if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Repology MCP Server 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?
C
Choose Changeflow 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).
- Primary tools included: tag, limit, query.
R
Choose Repology MCP Server 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).
- Primary tools included: query, limit, project_name.
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Changeflow Tools (9)
tag
Filter by tag
limit
Max results (default 50, max 200)
query
Keyword search across change content
since
ISO 8601 date
type
Filter by type: link (new pages found) or change (page content changed)
source_id
Filter to a specific source
looking_for
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).
Changeflow Configuration
Repology MCP Server Configuration