Field-by-field comparison

Compare the evidence before choosing an MCP.

Each signal stays separate, missing facts remain visible, and the column order follows your selection.

MCPs in this comparison

Firecrawl MCPHubSpot MCP

Uncheck an MCP to remove it. Comparing two or three keeps each signal in its own row.

Comparable alternatives

Azure MCP ServerMCP100 SelectedChrome DevTools MCPMCP100 SelectedContext7 MCPMCP100 SelectedGrafana Cloud MCPMCP100 SelectedGoogle MCP Toolbox for DatabasesMCP100 SelectedMCP Unity Editor (Game Engine)MCP100 Selected

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence field	Firecrawl MCPMCP100 Selected	HubSpot MCPMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for	Scraping and extracting public web pages Search, crawl, map, batch, and research workflows Teams already using Firecrawl API limits and governance	Querying CRM records, activities, marketing content, and organizational context Creating or updating supported CRM records and activities with confirmation Building managed AI workflows around HubSpot account data
Not ideal for	Simple known-page fetches that do not justify a paid API Sites whose terms or access controls prohibit automated collection Workflows requiring guaranteed freshness or extraction accuracy	Clients that do not support OAuth 2.1 with PKCE Vector or semantic CRM search, which the documented backend does not provide
Avoid when	You cannot govern which URLs the agent may access The workflow may collect personal, confidential, copyrighted, or access-controlled content without review Unexpected API-credit consumption is unacceptable	Existing HubSpot user permissions are broader than the intended agent workflow CRM or communication records cannot be shared with the chosen AI client Record creation, email logging, or meeting actions cannot require human approval
Provenance
Provenance details	First-party MCP Firecrawl · Publisher source ↗	First-party MCP HubSpot · Publisher source ↗
Maintenance
Maintenance details	Repo: Aug 12, 2026 Package: Aug 12, 2026	Repo: Not documented Package: Not documented
Popularity evidence
GitHub stars	7,234 GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	Not documented
30-day package downloads	412,488 30-day package downloads · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	No reliable download data
External adoption evidence	github: repository stars: 7,234Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗	Not documented
Client coverage
Client coverage details	Claude Code✓ Local stdio Claude Desktop✓ Local stdio Codex✓ Local stdio VS Code✓ Local stdio Cursor✓ Local stdio OpenCode✓ Local stdio	Claude Code✓ Streamable HTTP Claude Desktop✓ Streamable HTTP Codex✓ Streamable HTTP VS Code✓ Streamable HTTP Cursor✓ Streamable HTTP OpenCode✓ Streamable HTTP
Client coverage note	Local stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
Authentication	Cloud and local-package configurations use FIRECRAWL_API_KEY. Official docs also show hosted MCP URLs containing the key; environment-variable or protected input handling is safer than embedding the key in a URL.	OAuth 2.1 with PKCE is required. A HubSpot MCP auth app supplies client ID, client secret, and registered redirect URL; the user selects an account and grants available permissions.
Cost	MCP calls consume the account's standard Firecrawl API credits and rate limits. Search, crawl, batch, and agent operations can consume more resources than single-page scraping; current plan pricing applies.	HubSpot documents the remote MCP server as generally available to all HubSpot accounts without a separate MCP fee. HubSpot subscription features, API limits, integration hosting, and AI-client costs still apply.
Permissions	The MCP can initiate outbound requests to user- or model-selected URLs and invoke Firecrawl scrape, search, crawl, map, extraction, batch, and research capabilities according to enabled tools and account limits.	Read access includes CRM records, activities, marketing content, campaigns, and organizational context. Write access includes supported contacts, companies, deals, tickets, line items, products, calls, emails, meetings, notes, and tasks. Every action respects the authenticated HubSpot user's permissions.
Data handling	URLs, queries, extraction schemas, and retrieved page content are processed by the configured Firecrawl service. Cloud mode sends them to Firecrawl; self-hosted mode follows the operator's deployment and any configured model/provider dependencies.	HubSpot's hosted MCP service relays authorized CRM and activity data to the MCP client. Sensitive Data accounts block activity objects through MCP. Client credentials, OAuth tokens, retrieved records, and tool results must be protected by the integrating application.
Limitations
Tradeoffs	Broad scrape, crawl, search, and autonomous-agent tools are powerful but enlarge prompt-injection, compliance, and cost exposure. Cloud mode is easy to configure; self-hosting adds operational burden. Remote URL forms that embed an API key are convenient but can leak through configuration, logs, screenshots, or history.	The GA hosted service removes local server maintenance but requires creation and management of an MCP auth app. Available scopes follow current server tools and user-granted permissions; newly added scopes can require reauthorization. HubSpot blocks activity objects through MCP when Sensitive Data is enabled, reducing exposure but also capability.
Risk context	Main risks are prompt injection from untrusted pages, collection-policy violations, sensitive URL/query disclosure, API-key leakage, and agent-driven credit spend. Use URL allow-lists, low limits, human approval, and a dedicated low-budget key.	CRM and activity tools can expose personal and commercially sensitive data or create consequential customer records and communications. Use a dedicated auth app, narrow user permissions, secure PKCE and token storage, re-review scope changes, and confirm mutations. No MCP100 execution testing is claimed.
Evidence date
Editorial review	2026-07-24	2026-07-24
Candidate evidence	2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	2026-07-29T20:58:26.000Z

Popularity, maintenance, fit, permissions, and client support are independent evidence fields.

Read the evidence method →