Llm Context.py vs Easysend

In-depth architectural comparison of the Llm Context.py and Easysend 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 Llm Context.py when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the File Systems domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: Composable YAML+Markdown rules for task-specific context, Commands for file selection, context generation, and rule validation, Clipboard support for human workflows.

Explore Llm Context.py Details

Choose Easysend when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the File Systems domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: upload_files, get_bundle, download_file.

Explore Easysend Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Llm Context.py cyberchitta File Systems	Easysend File Systems
Summary	Share code context with LLMs via MCP or clipboard	EasySend file sharing MCP server - upload, download and share files. No authentication required.
Category & Scope	File Systems	File Systems

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": {
    "cyberchitta-llm-context-py": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "--from",
        "llm-context",
        "lc-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "easysend": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "easysend-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons