Companies House vs Mapa Societario — Spa… | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Companies House vs Mapa Societario — Spanish Company Registry (BORME)
In-depth architectural comparison of the Companies House and Mapa Societario — Spanish Company Registry (BORME) 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
Companies House
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 47/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Mapa Societario — Spanish Company Registry (BORME)
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 36/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Companies House if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Mapa Societario — Spanish Company Registry (BORME) 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?
Choose Companies House 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).
Companies House is categorized under Developer Tools and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Mapa Societario — Spanish Company Registry (BORME) belongs to Developer Tools using local stdio subprocess. Select Companies House when you need capabilities focused on developer tools and Mapa Societario — Spanish Company Registry (BORME) when you require tools for developer tools.