Interactive Terminal vs Phosphor

In-depth architectural comparison of the Interactive Terminal and Phosphor 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 Interactive Terminal when:

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

Explore Interactive Terminal Details

Choose Phosphor when:

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

Explore Phosphor Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Interactive Terminal Cloud Platforms	Phosphor Cloud Platforms
Summary	MCP server for real interactive terminal sessions — REPLs, SSH, databases, Docker	Hosts, metrics, Docker and authorized_keys over a macOS terminal's live SSH connections
Category & Scope	Cloud Platforms	Cloud Platforms
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": {
    "interactive-terminal": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mcp-interactive-terminal"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "phosphor": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "phosphor"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons