MCP Curiosity Engine vs Screenpipe

In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP Curiosity Engine and Screenpipe 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 Curiosity Engine 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: find_dormant_notes, find_orphan_notes, suggest_replay_cycle.

Explore MCP Curiosity Engine Details

Choose Screenpipe 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).

Explore Screenpipe Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	M MCP Curiosity Engine Knowledge & Memory	Screenpipe Knowledge & Memory
Summary	Surface the notes you forgot you wrote — DMN replay for markdown vaults.	Local-first workflow memory for AI agents. screenpipe lets MCP clients search selected screen, audio, app, and meeting context and turn real work into cited notes, SOPs, workflow reports, and automation candidates.
Category & Scope	Knowledge & Memory	Knowledge & Memory

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-curiosity-engine": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "mcp-curiosity-engine"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "screenpipe": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "screenpipe"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons