Cogram Project vs Chatterboxio MCP Server

In-depth architectural comparison of the Cogram Project and Chatterboxio 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.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

C

Choose Cogram Project when:

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

Explore Cogram Project Details

Choose Chatterboxio MCP Server when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: platform, meetingId, meetingPassword.

Explore Chatterboxio MCP Server Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	C Cogram Project Communication	Chatterboxio MCP Server OverQuotaAI Communication
Summary	Read-only access to Cogram projects, meetings, emails, RFIs and drawings for AEC teams	MCP server implementation for ChatterBox.io, enabling AI agents to send bots to online meetings (Zoom, Google Meet) and obtain transcripts and recordings.
Category & Scope	Communication

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": {
    "cogram-project": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "cogram-project"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "overquotaai-chatterboxio-mcp-server": {
      "url": "https://api.chatter-box.io"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons