Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Kooma — Bambara AI vs RiverScript
In-depth architectural comparison of the Kooma — Bambara AI and RiverScript 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
Kooma — Bambara AI
Speech-to-Text · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 30/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
RiverScript
Speech-to-Text · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 30/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Kooma — Bambara AI if you need specialized Speech-to-Text tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose RiverScript if your workspace requires Speech-to-Text 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 Kooma — Bambara AI when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Speech-to-Text domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
R
Choose RiverScript when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Speech-to-Text 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
Kooma — Bambara AI Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
RiverScript 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).
Kooma — Bambara AI Configuration
RiverScript Configuration