Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Katto vs OpenClip
In-depth architectural comparison of the Katto and OpenClip 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
Katto
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 52/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
OpenClip
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 42/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Katto if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose OpenClip if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
K
Choose Katto 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).
- Primary tools included: status, completed, clips.
O
Choose OpenClip 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).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Katto Tools (4)
status
completed
clips
caption_style
OpenClip Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
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).
Katto Configuration
OpenClip Configuration