Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
MCP 1c Platform Tools vs Tldraw
In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP 1c Platform Tools and Tldraw 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
MCP 1c Platform Tools
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 44/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Tldraw
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 52/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose MCP 1c Platform Tools if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose Tldraw if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
M
Choose MCP 1c Platform Tools 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).
T
Choose Tldraw 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).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
MCP 1c Platform Tools Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Tldraw 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).
MCP 1c Platform Tools Configuration
Tldraw Configuration