Steep vs Honeycomb

In-depth architectural comparison of the Steep and Honeycomb 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 Steep when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Monitoring domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Steep Details

H

Choose Honeycomb when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Monitoring domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Honeycomb Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Steep Monitoring	H Honeycomb Monitoring
Summary	Query metrics, targets, entities, and team data in your Steep workspace via MCP.	Query Honeycomb observability data: traces, events, metrics, SLOs, triggers, and boards.
Category & Scope	Monitoring	Monitoring
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": {
    "steep": {
      "url": "https://mcp.steep.app/mcp"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "honeycomb": {
      "url": "https://docs.honeycomb.io/integrations/mcp"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons