Whitemagic MCP vs EchoVault Memory

In-depth architectural comparison of the Whitemagic MCP and EchoVault Memory 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?

W

Choose Whitemagic 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).

Explore Whitemagic MCP Details

Choose EchoVault Memory 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).

Explore EchoVault Memory Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	W Whitemagic MCP Knowledge & Memory	EchoVault Memory Knowledge & Memory
Summary	Local-first memory and session continuity for AI coding agents over MCP. No cloud, no telemetry.	Local-first memory for coding agents; stores decisions, bugs, and context across sessions.
Category & Scope	Knowledge & Memory	Knowledge & Memory

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": {
    "whitemagic-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "whitemagic-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "echovault-memory": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "echovault-memory"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons