Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Oxcode vs Kivgraph
In-depth architectural comparison of the Oxcode and Kivgraph 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
Oxcode
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 27/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Kivgraph
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 36/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Oxcode if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Kivgraph if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
O
Choose Oxcode 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).
K
Choose Kivgraph 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).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Oxcode Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Kivgraph 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).
Oxcode Configuration
Kivgraph Configuration
Frequently Asked Questions
More alternatives to OxcodeMore alternatives to KivgraphDeveloper Tools category hubCanonical compare URL