Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
MCP Bookmark vs Sverklo
In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP Bookmark and Sverklo 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 Bookmark
Knowledge & Memory · Local stdio
Quality: 43/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Sverklo
Knowledge & Memory · Local stdio
Quality: 49/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose MCP Bookmark if you need specialized Knowledge & Memory tools running via a local process. Choose Sverklo if your workspace requires Knowledge & Memory 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 Bookmark when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
- Primary tools included: save_bookmark, search_bookmarks.
S
Choose Sverklo when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory 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 Bookmark Tools (2)
save_bookmark
Save a new bookmark.
search_bookmarks
Search through saved bookmarks.
Sverklo 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 Bookmark Configuration
Sverklo Configuration