Google Drive vs Filesystem MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Google Drive and Filesystem 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 Google Drive when:

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

Explore Google Drive Details

Choose Filesystem MCP when:

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

Explore Filesystem MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Google Drive File Systems	Filesystem MCP File Systems
Summary	Google Drive at the file boundary: find, organise, share, transfer and follow what changed.	MCP Server that enables LLMs to interact with the local filesystem.
Category & Scope	File Systems	File Systems
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": {
    "google-drive-3": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "google-drive-3"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "filesystem-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@j0hanz/filesystem-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons