ConsentStack vs VoteShip

In-depth architectural comparison of the ConsentStack and VoteShip 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 ConsentStack when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Product Management domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore ConsentStack Details

Choose VoteShip when:

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

Explore VoteShip Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	C ConsentStack Product Management	VoteShip Product Management
Summary	Set up GDPR and CCPA cookie consent: create a site, publish a banner, scan and categorize trackers.	Manage feature requests, votes, roadmaps, and changelogs from any MCP client.
Category & Scope	Product Management	Product Management
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": {
    "consentstack": {
      "url": "https://www.consentstack.io/docs/developers/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "voteship-2": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@voteship/cli"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons