Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Sliq vs Userport
In-depth architectural comparison of the Sliq and Userport 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
Sliq
Communication · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 37/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Userport
Communication · Local stdio
Quality: 25/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Sliq if you need specialized Communication tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose Userport if your workspace requires Communication integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
S
Choose Sliq when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
U
Choose Userport when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Sliq Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Userport 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).
Sliq Configuration
Userport Configuration