Citation Verification vs Touch Browser
A side-by-side look at the Citation Verification and Touch Browser MCP servers: transport, auth, tools, quality signals, and the config to install either one in Claude, Cursor, Windsurf or VS Code.
Verdict: choose Citation Verification for research work over a hosted endpoint; choose Touch Browser for research as a local process. You can also run both side by side in one mcpServers block.
Which MCP server should you choose?
Choose Citation Verification when
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Research domain.
- You prefer a remote HTTP/SSE transport.
- You want tools like
fact_check, cite_check, source_freshness.
Choose Touch Browser when
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Research domain.
- You prefer a local stdio subprocess transport.
- Its auth model fits you: No auth required.
Feature & specification comparison
Rows where the two servers differ are marked.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Category | Research | Research |
| Quality signal | 43/100 · Fair | 51/100 · Good |
| Install command | Confirmed | Confirmed |
| Transport | Remote HTTP/SSE | Local subprocess (stdio) |
| Auth | Not declared | No auth required |
| Pricing | Not declared | Free |
| Required env vars | None listed | None listed |
| Verified owner | Community listing | Community listing |
| GitHub stars | 1 | 10 |
| Directory activity | 0 views 0 installs 0 upvotes | 3 views 0 installs 0 upvotes |
| Tools | 3 | Not listed |
| Full listing | View Citation Verification | View Touch Browser |
Tools & capabilities
Citation Verification tools 3
fact_checkVerify a factual claim against Wikipedia + Wikidata + Crossref. Returns verdict + supporting passages.cite_checkVerify cited URLs resolve, match the cited claim, and aren't retracted.source_freshnessCheck whether a source URL is live + last-modified + most-recent Wayback snapshot.
Touch Browser tools
No tool names declared yet. Check the project README from the listing page.
Ready-to-paste client configs
Paste either block (or both) into your client config, e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json. We only show a config when the install command is confirmed.
Citation Verification
{
"mcpServers": {
"citation-verification": {
"url": "https://verification-mcp.atlasword.workers.dev/mcp"
}
}
}
Touch Browser
{
"mcpServers": {
"nangman-infra-touch-browser": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@nangman-infra/touch-browser-mcp"
]
}
}
}
Frequently asked questions
Citation Verification is categorized under Research and uses a remote HTTP/SSE transport. Touch Browser belongs to Research and uses a local stdio subprocess. Pick Citation Verification for research work and Touch Browser for research.
Copy the mcpServers block from the config section on this page into your client's config (for example claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json), then fully restart the client.
Citation Verification has no declared pricing — check the project's own site. Touch Browser is listed as free. Auth: no auth required. If a server needs environment variables such as API keys, define them under the env key in your client's MCP config.
Yes. MCP clients support multiple servers: add citation-verification and nangman-infra-touch-browser as separate keys in the same mcpServers object, and your assistant will call tools from either one.
On AllMCPs, Citation Verification has a quality signal of 43/100 (Fair) with 0 views, 0 installs and 1 GitHub stars. Touch Browser has 51/100 (Good) with 3 views, 0 installs and 10 GitHub stars.