Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
MCP Light Memory vs Pindoc
In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP Light Memory and Pindoc 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 Light Memory
Knowledge & Memory · Local stdio
Quality: 39/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Pindoc
Knowledge & Memory · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 43/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose MCP Light Memory if you need specialized Knowledge & Memory tools running via a local process. Choose Pindoc if your workspace requires Knowledge & Memory integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
M
Choose MCP Light Memory 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).
P
Choose Pindoc when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
MCP Light Memory Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Pindoc 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 Light Memory Configuration
Pindoc Configuration