MCP Architector vs MCP Typescribe

In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP Architector and MCP Typescribe 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?

M

Choose MCP Architector 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: set-entry, set-entries, get-entry.

Explore MCP Architector Details

Choose MCP Typescribe 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: Loads and indexes TypeDoc JSON documentation, Supports symbol search with filtering by kind, Provides detailed symbol and parameter information.

Explore MCP Typescribe Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	M MCP Architector Developer Tools	MCP Typescribe yWorks Developer Tools
Summary	MCP server for architecture and system design. Store and manage project architecture locally.	MCP server that provides Typescript API information efficiently to the agent to enable it to work with untrained APIs
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": {
    "mcp-architector": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mcp-architector"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "yworks-mcp-typescribe": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "typedoc"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons