Vault Health MCP vs Scrivener MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Vault Health MCP and Scrivener MCP 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?

V

Choose Vault Health MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: configure_vault, check_vault_health, find_orphans.

Explore Vault Health MCP Details

Choose Scrivener MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: Scrivener 3 document access and editing, Deterministic writing analysis, Keyword and offline semantic search.

Explore Scrivener MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	V Vault Health MCP Knowledge & Memory	Scrivener MCP writerslogic Knowledge & Memory
Summary
Category & Scope	Knowledge & Memory	Knowledge & Memory
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": {
    "vault-health-mcp": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "vault-health-mcp",
        "--vault",
        "/path/to/vault"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "writerslogic-scrivener-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "scrivener-setup"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons