Email Spam Tester vs MX Verdict

In-depth architectural comparison of the Email Spam Tester and MX Verdict 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 Email Spam Tester when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: Disposable test address reservation, Asynchronous report waiting, 42 email deliverability checks.

Explore Email Spam Tester Details

M

Choose MX Verdict when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore MX Verdict Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Email Spam Tester VerifiedCommunication	M MX Verdict Communication
Summary	Email deliverability testing for agents. Four tools: get a disposable test address, wait for the report once the message arrives, read it, and fetch the raw source. The report has 42 checks (SPF, DKIM, DMARC, 21 blocklists, two spam engines, Gmail and Yahoo bulk sender rules), each linked to its RFC, plus a fix plan. Remote endpoint, no API key.	Free, read-only email and DNS checks: SPF, DKIM, DMARC, MX, DNS records, blocklists, domain health.
Category & Scope

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": {
    "email-spam-tester": {
      "url": "https://email-spam-tester.com/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mx-verdict": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mx-verdict"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons