Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Todoist vs Linear
In-depth architectural comparison of the Todoist and Linear 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
Todoist
Workplace & Productivity · Local stdio
Quality: 21/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Linear
Workplace & Productivity · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 41/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Todoist if you need specialized Workplace & Productivity tools running via a local process. Choose Linear if your workspace requires Workplace & Productivity 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 Todoist when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Workplace & Productivity domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
L
Choose Linear when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Workplace & Productivity domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Todoist Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Linear 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).
Todoist Configuration
Linear Configuration
Frequently Asked Questions
More alternatives to TodoistMore alternatives to LinearWorkplace & Productivity category hubCanonical compare URL