Firmament vs Forage — Web Intelligence & Knowledge Graph
In-depth architectural comparison of the Firmament and Forage — Web Intelligence & Knowledge Graph 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
Firmament
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 40/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Forage — Web Intelligence & Knowledge Graph
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 36/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Firmament if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose Forage — Web Intelligence & Knowledge Graph 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?
Choose Firmament when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Firmament is categorized under Developer Tools and uses a remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. In contrast, Forage — Web Intelligence & Knowledge Graph belongs to Developer Tools using local stdio subprocess. Select Firmament when you need capabilities focused on developer tools and Forage — Web Intelligence & Knowledge Graph when you require tools for developer tools.