Duration vs Valet — MCP Server Comparison | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Duration vs Valet
In-depth architectural comparison of the Duration and Valet 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
Duration
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 40/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Valet
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 48/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Duration if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Valet if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
D
Choose Duration 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).
Parse an ISO 8601 duration string (e.g. "PT1H30M", "P1Y2M10DT2H") into its components and an approximate total in seconds (keyless, offline). Note: months=30d, years=365d for the estimate.
format_duration
Convert a number of seconds into an ISO 8601 duration string and a human-readable form (keyless, offline).
Valet 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).
Duration is categorized under Developer Tools and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Valet belongs to Developer Tools using local stdio subprocess. Select Duration when you need capabilities focused on developer tools and Valet when you require tools for developer tools.