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

io.github.blazickjp/arxiv-mcp-serverGitHub 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 SelectedFirecrawl MCPMCP100 SelectedGrafana Cloud MCPMCP100 SelectedGoogle MCP Toolbox for DatabasesMCP100 Selected

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence field	io.github.blazickjp/arxiv-mcp-serverWatchlist candidate	GitHub MCPMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for	Searching arXiv and retrieving or organizing papers through an MCP research workflow	Repository, issue, pull-request, and code context Teams that can issue a narrowly scoped PAT or use the hosted OAuth flow Read-only GitHub investigation using restricted toolsets
Not ideal for	Systematic literature reviews, paywalled coverage, citation-complete searches, or judging research quality from metadata alone	Git hosting outside GitHub Users unable to run Docker for the documented local configuration Workflows that need only a small amount of public repository context
Avoid when	A downstream answer would cite or summarize a paper without checking its identity, version, content, and publication status	You cannot restrict the token to the necessary repositories and scopes The agent must not receive private repository, issue, pull-request, or user data Your organization has not approved the OAuth app or PAT policy
Provenance
Provenance details	Community implementation io.github.blazickjp · Publisher source ↗	First-party MCP GitHub · Publisher source ↗
Maintenance
Maintenance details	Repo: Aug 14, 2026 Package: Jul 29, 2026	Repo: Aug 14, 2026 Package: Not documented
Popularity evidence
GitHub stars	3,052 GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	32,248 GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z
30-day package downloads	79,761 PyPI Stats package downloads · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	No reliable download data
External adoption evidence	github: repository stars: 3,052Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗ PyPI Stats: package downloads: 79,761Non-comparable contextual signal.PyPI Stats: package downloads · Provider last month · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗	github: repository stars: 32,248Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
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	No authentication is documented for local stdio. HTTP defaults to 127.0.0.1; the publisher requires authentication and network controls if a reverse proxy exposes it.	Hosted service supports OAuth; local stdio uses GITHUB_PERSONAL_ACCESS_TOKEN. GitHub recommends minimum scopes, separate tokens, rotation, and environment-variable handling.
Cost	The Apache-2.0 project lists no MCP fee. External service quotas or provider charges are not documented.	The open-source server is MIT licensed. GitHub account, Copilot, Enterprise, Actions, API, or other product charges and limits may apply independently.
Permissions	Searches arXiv, retrieves abstracts and LaTeX, downloads and converts papers, reads local papers, queries citations, exports citations, and creates or updates local topic watches and indexes.	Access follows the authenticated GitHub identity and granted OAuth/PAT permissions. The server supports tool allow-lists, read-only mode, repository-oriented toolsets, and lockdown mode; write tools remain possible unless read-only mode is enabled.
Data handling	Papers and indexes stay local while searches, source retrieval, citation graphs, and downloads call external services. Paper text and LaTeX are untrusted external content; retention and model-training behavior are not documented.	Repository contents, issues, pull requests, users, actions, and other enabled GitHub API data may be returned to the MCP client. The local server passes requests to GitHub; the hosted server is operated by GitHub. Do not place PATs in committed configuration.
Limitations
Tradeoffs	Natural-language paper discovery is convenient, while arXiv coverage, metadata, versions, and model-generated summaries can be incomplete or wrong.	The default local toolsets include repositories, issues, pull requests, users, and context; limiting toolsets reduces capability and context size. Local Docker keeps the MCP process local but still sends authorized requests to GitHub APIs. PAT setup is explicit and portable, while hosted OAuth is easier but relies on GitHub's remote MCP service.
Risk context	Downloaded papers can contain prompt-injection instructions, and exposed HTTP could reveal research tools. Keep HTTP private, use approval controls, and treat paper content as untrusted.	A broadly scoped token plus write-capable tools can alter repositories and collaboration records. Prefer fine-grained credentials, repository restriction, explicit toolsets, GITHUB_READ_ONLY=1, and lockdown mode where public-content prompt injection is a concern.
Evidence date
Editorial review	2026-08-11	2026-07-24
Candidate evidence	2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

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

Read the evidence method →