MCP Firefly Iii vs Archstone

In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP Firefly Iii and Archstone 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?

Choose MCP Firefly Iii 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: firefly_query, firefly_mutate, firefly_destructive.

Explore MCP Firefly Iii Details

Choose Archstone 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).

Explore Archstone Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	MCP Firefly Iii Developer Tools	Archstone Developer Tools
Summary	Security-first, self-hosted MCP server for Firefly III — 152 operations behind 5 scoped tools.	Compile your own business capabilities from declarative YAML and serve them as MCP tools.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
Quality signal

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-firefly-iii": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@yakupemreyerli/firefly-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

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

Related MCP Server Comparisons