Harvis.dev vs Inflow

In-depth architectural comparison of the Harvis.dev and Inflow 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?

H

Choose Harvis.dev when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Harvis.dev Details

Choose Inflow 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 Inflow Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	H Harvis.dev Developer Tools	Inflow Developer Tools
Summary	Deploy static sites from AI agents: deploy_site publishes files and returns a live URL in seconds.	MCP Server for agents to onboard, pay, and provision services autonomously with InFlow
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": {
    "harvis-dev": {
      "url": "https://harvis.dev"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "inflow-2": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mcp-remote"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons