Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
CP Memory vs VersionPill
In-depth architectural comparison of the CP Memory and VersionPill 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
CP Memory
Knowledge & Memory · Local stdio
Quality: 39/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
VersionPill
Knowledge & Memory · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 40/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose CP Memory if you need specialized Knowledge & Memory tools running via a local process. Choose VersionPill if your workspace requires Knowledge & Memory integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
C
Choose CP Memory 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).
V
Choose VersionPill 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).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
CP Memory Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
VersionPill Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
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).
CP Memory Configuration
VersionPill Configuration