Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Tfl vs Tfl MCP Server
In-depth architectural comparison of the Tfl and Tfl MCP Server 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
Tfl
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 25/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Tfl MCP Server
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 51/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Tfl if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Tfl MCP Server if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
T
Choose Tfl when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
T
Choose Tfl MCP Server when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
- Primary tools included: service_status, arrivals, journey.
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Tfl Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Tfl MCP Server Tools (6)
service_status
Current status and disruptions by mode
arrivals
Live arrivals at a stop by name
journey
Plan a journey between two points
bike_points
List Santander Cycles docking stations
crowding
Live station crowding level by name
fares
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).
Tfl Configuration
Tfl MCP Server Configuration