UptimeRobot vs StillOnline — MCP Server Comparison | AllMCPs
UptimeRobot vs StillOnline
A side-by-side look at the UptimeRobot and StillOnline MCP servers: transport, auth, tools, quality signals, and the config to install either one in Claude, Cursor, Windsurf or VS Code.
Verdict: choose UptimeRobot for monitoring work over a hosted endpoint; choose StillOnline for monitoring as a local process. You can also run both side by side in one mcpServers block.
Which MCP server should you choose?
Choose UptimeRobot when
You need dedicated capabilities in the Monitoring domain.
Paste either block (or both) into your client config, e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json. We only show a config when the install command is confirmed.
UptimeRobot is categorized under Monitoring and uses a remote HTTP/SSE transport. StillOnline belongs to Monitoring and uses a local stdio subprocess. Pick UptimeRobot for monitoring work and StillOnline for monitoring.
Copy the mcpServers block from the config section on this page into your client's config (for example claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json), then fully restart the client.
UptimeRobot has no declared pricing — check the project's own site. StillOnline has no declared pricing — check the project's own site. If a server needs environment variables such as API keys, define them under the env key in your client's MCP config.
Yes. MCP clients support multiple servers: add uptimerobot and stillonline as separate keys in the same mcpServers object, and your assistant will call tools from either one.
On AllMCPs, UptimeRobot has a quality signal of 37/100 (Fair) with 0 views, 0 installs and 24 GitHub stars. StillOnline has 52/100 (Good) with 0 views, 0 installs and 1 GitHub stars.