Clinicaltrials vs Fruityvice

In-depth architectural comparison of the Clinicaltrials and Fruityvice 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 Clinicaltrials 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 Clinicaltrials Details

Choose Fruityvice 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 Fruityvice Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	C Clinicaltrials Developer Tools	Fruityvice Developer Tools
Summary	ClinicalTrials MCP — wraps ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 (free, no auth)	Fruityvice MCP — wraps Fruityvice API (free, no auth)
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": {
    "clinicaltrials": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "clinicaltrials"
      ]
    }
  }
}

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

Related MCP Server Comparisons