CVM: Participante vs SEFAZ: PR

In-depth architectural comparison of the CVM: Participante and SEFAZ: PR 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 CVM: Participante 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).

Explore CVM: Participante Details

Choose SEFAZ: PR 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).

Explore SEFAZ: PR Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	CVM: Participante Developer Tools	SEFAZ: PR Developer Tools
Summary	CVM: Participante, official-source lookup. Platform-hosted, pay per query with prepaid credit.	SEFAZ: PR, official-source lookup. Platform-hosted, pay per query with prepaid credit.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
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": {
    "cvm-participante": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "cvm-participante"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "sefaz-pr": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "sefaz-pr"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons