Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Nasa Firms vs Starfetch
In-depth architectural comparison of the Nasa Firms and Starfetch 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
Nasa Firms
Aerospace & Astrodynamics · Local stdio
Quality: 27/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Starfetch
Aerospace & Astrodynamics · Local stdio
Quality: 43/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Nasa Firms if you need specialized Aerospace & Astrodynamics tools running via a local process. Choose Starfetch if your workspace requires Aerospace & Astrodynamics integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
N
Choose Nasa Firms when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Aerospace & Astrodynamics domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
S
Choose Starfetch when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Aerospace & Astrodynamics domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Nasa Firms Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Starfetch 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).
Nasa Firms Configuration
Starfetch Configuration