Memory vs Interactive MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Memory and Interactive MCP 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 Memory when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Other Tools and Integrations domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: Knowledge graph-based data storage, Persistent memory for LLMs, Reference implementation for MCP SDK usage.

Explore Memory Details

Choose Interactive MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Other Tools and Integrations domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: request_user_input, message_complete_notification, start_intensive_chat.

Explore Interactive MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Memory VerifiedOther Tools and Integrations	Interactive MCP ttommyth Other Tools and Integrations
Summary	Knowledge graph-based persistent memory system.	Enables interactive LLM workflows by adding local user prompts and chat capabilities directly into the MCP loop.
Category & Scope

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": {
    "memory": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@modelcontextprotocol/server-memory"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ttommyth-interactive-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "interactive-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons