Sentarion vs ArkHive MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Sentarion and ArkHive 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 Sentarion 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 Sentarion Details

Choose ArkHive 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).

Explore ArkHive MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Sentarion Knowledge & Memory	ArkHive MCP Knowledge & Memory
Summary	Governed multi-agent orchestration: fan-out dispatch, safety gates, tamper-evident memory.	ArkHive MCP: governed, tamper-evident local memory for AI agents. Where context gives meaning.
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": {
    "sentarion": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "sentarion-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "arkhive-mcp": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "arkhive-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons