Foxhound vs Thinkrun

In-depth architectural comparison of the Foxhound and Thinkrun 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 Foxhound 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 Foxhound Details

Choose Thinkrun 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 Thinkrun Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Foxhound Developer Tools	Thinkrun Developer Tools
Summary	MCP server for querying Foxhound traces from Claude Code, Cursor, and other MCP clients	Browser control + session recording MCP for AI coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor) — real Chrome.
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": {
    "foxhound": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "foxhound-ai"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "thinkrun": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@thinkrun/mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons