Receptionist Toolkit vs Voice Bridge

In-depth architectural comparison of the Receptionist Toolkit and Voice Bridge 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?

R

Choose Receptionist Toolkit when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Text-to-Speech domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Receptionist Toolkit Details

Choose Voice Bridge when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Text-to-Speech domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: speak, set_engine, get_status.

Explore Voice Bridge Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	R Receptionist Toolkit Text-to-Speech	Voice Bridge Text-to-Speech
Summary	Free receptionist tools: phone scripts, IVR menus (EN+ES), ElevenLabs prompts, missed-call math	Multi-engine TTS for AI coding assistants. Free, 5 engines, no API key needed.
Category & Scope	Text-to-Speech	Text-to-Speech
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": {
    "receptionist-toolkit": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "receptionist-toolkit"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "voice-bridge": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "ai-voice-bridge"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons