Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP vs PyreCrawl
In-depth architectural comparison of the Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP and PyreCrawl 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
Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP
Search & Data Extraction · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 69/100 (Great) | Auth: API Key required
PyreCrawl
Search & Data Extraction · Local stdio
Quality: 48/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP if you need specialized Search & Data Extraction tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose PyreCrawl if your workspace requires Search & Data Extraction integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Search & Data Extraction domain.
You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: API Key required (Free / Open Source).
Connect Claude, Cursor, Codex, or other MCP clients to GMaps Lead Finder through a remote MCP endpoint with Bearer authentication, documented tools, and usage limits.
One tool for AI agents to scrape, crawl, extract, map, and search the web. Self-hosted, no API keys.
Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP is categorized under Search & Data Extraction and uses a remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. In contrast, PyreCrawl belongs to Search & Data Extraction using local stdio subprocess. Select Google Maps Lead Finder Agent API & MCP when you need capabilities focused on search & data extraction and PyreCrawl when you require tools for search & data extraction.