Screenpipe vs Vault Health MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Screenpipe and Vault Health 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 Screenpipe 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).

Explore Screenpipe Details

V

Choose Vault Health MCP 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).
• Primary tools included: configure_vault, check_vault_health, find_orphans.

Explore Vault Health MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Screenpipe Knowledge & Memory	V Vault Health MCP Knowledge & Memory
Summary	Local-first workflow memory for AI agents. screenpipe lets MCP clients search selected screen, audio, app, and meeting context and turn real work into cited notes, SOPs, workflow reports, and automation candidates.	Obsidian vault structural health: broken links, orphans, missing frontmatter, safe auto-repair.
Category & Scope	Knowledge & Memory	Knowledge & Memory

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": {
    "screenpipe": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "screenpipe"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "vault-health-mcp": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "vault-health-mcp",
        "--vault",
        "/path/to/vault"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons