Seovendor vs Crawlie — MCP Server Comparison | AllMCPs
Seovendor vs Crawlie
A side-by-side look at the Seovendor and Crawlie MCP servers: transport, auth, tools, quality signals, and the config to install either one in Claude, Cursor, Windsurf or VS Code.
Verdict: choose Seovendor for marketing work over a hosted endpoint; choose Crawlie for marketing over a hosted endpoint. You can also run both side by side in one mcpServers block.
Which MCP server should you choose?
S
Choose Seovendor when
You need dedicated capabilities in the Marketing domain.
No tool names declared yet. Check the project README from the listing page.
Crawlie tools 6
crawl_siteCrawl + audit a whole site (SEO + GEO), returns scores, issues, per-page data
audit_urlAudit a single page
audit_urlsAudit an explicit list of pages
explain_issueWhy a rule matters + how to fix it
list_rulesThe full catalogue of checks
list_reportsRead saved crawl history
Ready-to-paste client configs
Paste either block (or both) into your client config, e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json. We only show a config when the install command is confirmed.
Seovendor is categorized under Marketing and uses a remote HTTP/SSE transport. Crawlie belongs to Marketing and uses a remote HTTP/SSE transport. Pick Seovendor for marketing work and Crawlie for marketing.
Copy the mcpServers block from the config section on this page into your client's config (for example claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json), then fully restart the client.
Seovendor has no declared pricing — check the project's own site. Crawlie has no declared pricing — check the project's own site. If a server needs environment variables such as API keys, define them under the env key in your client's MCP config.
Yes. MCP clients support multiple servers: add seovendor and crawlie as separate keys in the same mcpServers object, and your assistant will call tools from either one.
On AllMCPs, Seovendor has a quality signal of 44/100 (Fair) with 2 views, 0 installs and 0 GitHub stars. Crawlie has 55/100 (Good) with 1 views, 0 installs and 114 GitHub stars.