Giskard Memory vs Moxie Docs MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Giskard Memory and Moxie Docs MCP 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 Giskard Memory when:

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

Explore Giskard Memory Details

Choose Moxie Docs MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Freemium).
• Primary tools included: moxie.get_ai_context, moxie.get_doc_impact, moxie.get_api_context.

Explore Moxie Docs MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Giskard Memory Knowledge & Memory	Moxie Docs MCP FeaturedVerifiedKnowledge & Memory
Summary	Pay-per-use semantic memory for AI agents. SHA256 commitment, Ed25519 sig, Lightning.	MCP & Agent Skills for Automated Documentation, and codebase conventions + context
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": {
    "giskard-memory": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "moxie-docs-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "moxie-docs"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons