Codeweb vs Slipstream

In-depth architectural comparison of the Codeweb and Slipstream 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?

Choose Codeweb 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 Codeweb Details

S

Choose Slipstream 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: known_hash, section, since.

Explore Slipstream Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Codeweb Developer Tools	S Slipstream Developer Tools
Summary	Your agents break less code and burn fewer tokens — a deterministic call graph over 27 MCP tools.	Shared distillation cache for AI agents — every fetch ~73-89% fewer tokens via a shared cache.
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": {
    "codeweb": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@ghostlygawd/codeweb"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "slipstream": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mcp-remote",
        "https://slipstream-pi.vercel.app/api/mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons