Contexta vs Engram Cc

In-depth architectural comparison of the Contexta and Engram Cc 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 Contexta when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: search, read_page, create_page.

Explore Contexta Details

Choose Engram Cc when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: recall, search, recent.

Explore Engram Cc Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Contexta Knowledge & Memory	Engram Cc Knowledge & Memory
Summary	Persistent memory and knowledge graph for AI assistants — keyword + vector + graph search.	Universal AI coding assistant memory — session handoff, SLM compression, and semantic retrieval.
Category & Scope	Knowledge & Memory	Knowledge & Memory
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": {
    "contexta": {
      "url": "https://mcp.contexta.cc/mcp"
    }
  }
}

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

Related MCP Server Comparisons