Google Search Console vs PyreCrawl

In-depth architectural comparison of the Google Search Console 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.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose Google Search Console when:

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

Explore Google Search Console Details

Choose PyreCrawl when:

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

Explore PyreCrawl Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Google Search Console Search & Data Extraction	PyreCrawl Search & Data Extraction
Summary	Google Search Console MCP server — search analytics, URL inspection, and sitemaps	One tool for AI agents to scrape, crawl, extract, map, and search the web. Self-hosted, no API keys.
Category & Scope	Search & Data Extraction	Search & Data Extraction

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-search-console-6": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@sarahpark/google-search-console-mcp@1.1.0"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "pyrecrawl": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "pyrecrawl@latest"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons