Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Tldraw vs Zerno Lite
In-depth architectural comparison of the Tldraw and Zerno Lite 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
Tldraw
Developer Tools · Local stdio
Quality: 52/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Zerno Lite
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 49/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Tldraw if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a local process. Choose Zerno Lite if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
T
Choose Tldraw 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).
Z
Choose Zerno Lite when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
- Primary tools included: zerno_get_project_brief, zerno_get_agent_context, zerno_list_tasks.
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Tldraw Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Zerno Lite Tools (8)
zerno_get_project_brief
no
zerno_get_agent_context
no
zerno_list_tasks
no
zerno_get_task
no
zerno_update_task
mutates
zerno_submit_task_triage
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).
Tldraw Configuration
Zerno Lite Configuration