Kaal Corpus: Verifiable Claim Layer vs PDF Reader MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Kaal Corpus: Verifiable Claim Layer and PDF Reader 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 Kaal Corpus: Verifiable Claim Layer 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 Kaal Corpus: Verifiable Claim Layer Details

Choose PDF Reader MCP 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 PDF Reader MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Kaal Corpus: Verifiable Claim Layer Developer Tools	PDF Reader MCP Developer Tools
Summary	Cite the claim, not the paper: 5,033 assertions, each hash-verifiable against its source PDF	Evidence-first PDF MCP. Agent Document Twin with citeable page+bbox evidence.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools

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": {
    "kaal-corpus-verifiable-claim-layer": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "kaal-corpus-verifiable-claim-layer"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "pdf-reader-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@sylphx/citra"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons