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

Lucid MCPContentful MCP Server

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

Comparable alternatives

Google Search Console MCP Server for SEOsMCP100 RecommendedPlaywright MCPMCP100 RecommendedHugging Face MCPMCP100 RecommendedFramelink MCP for FigmaMCP100 RecommendedAsana MCPMCP100 RecommendedsanityMCP100 Recommended

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence field	Lucid MCPShortlist candidate	Contentful MCP ServerMCP100 Recommended
Task fit
Best for	Search, read, create, and edit Lucid visual documents Lucid users who need to search, read, create, and edit lucid visual documents.	Connect compatible AI clients to Contentful's documented MCP capabilities.
Not ideal for	The default endpoint permits supported writes; use https://mcp.lucid.app/mcp/readonly for discovery-only access. Lucid MCP is not available for FedRAMP accounts, and a separate repositories endpoint serves different workflows.	Users who need a fully reviewed MCP100 recommendation today
Avoid when	The default endpoint permits supported writes; use https://mcp.lucid.app/mcp/readonly for discovery-only access. Lucid MCP is not available for FedRAMP accounts, and a separate repositories endpoint serves different workflows.	Permissions, credentials, and connected data cannot be tested with least privilege
Provenance
Provenance details	First-party MCP Lucid · Publisher source ↗	First-party MCP Contentful · Publisher source ↗
Maintenance
Maintenance details	Repo: Not documented Package: Not documented	Repo: Aug 7, 2026 Package: Aug 7, 2026
Popularity evidence
GitHub stars	Not documented	61 GitHub stars · checked 2026-09-25T18:35:00Z
Package downloads / 30 days	No reliable download data	21,613 package downloads / 30 days · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z
Shared repository stars	3 Shared repository stars (not MCP-specific) · checked 2026-10-20	Not documented
External adoption evidence	Not documented	npm: package downloads: 19,287Exact attributable signal.npm: package downloads · Rolling 30 days · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
Client coverage
Client coverage details	Not documented	Claude Code✓ Local stdio Claude Desktop✓ Local stdio Codex✓ Local stdio VS Code✓ Local stdio Cursor✓ Local stdio OpenCode✓ Local stdio
Client coverage note	Local stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
Authentication	OAuth by default; Lucid Team and Enterprise users can also authenticate with an API key.	Contentful Management API PAT
Cost	No separate MCP fee is documented. Lucid offers free and paid plans; account/product capabilities depend on the selected plan.	Contentful account/plan limits apply
Permissions	The MCP can access only documents the authenticated user already has permission to access within the Lucid account; it cannot access documents owned by users outside that account.	Contentful roles + space/environment scope; PROTECTED_ENVIRONMENTS can block env-scoped writes/deletes
Data handling	Lucid states that its MCP server acts as a pass-through and does not retain document content, user prompts, or queries. User credentials are not shared outside the Lucid account.	Content/asset metadata to Contentful CMA under configured token/space/environment
Limitations
Tradeoffs	Shortlist evidence is sufficient for identity, setup and task value; authenticated runtime tool-schema measurement and exhaustive security certification remain out of scope.	Publisher attribution supports discovery, but does not replace an independent permissions and usability review.
Risk context	The MCP can expose and operate on diagrams/documents the user can access. The main risk is unintended disclosure or modification of collaborative Lucid content within the user's existing permissions.	CVE-2026-53957 fixed from 1.7.19; current source 1.21.1
Evidence date
Editorial review	2026-10-19	2026-07-24
Candidate evidence	2026-10-20	2026-09-25T18:35:00Z

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

Read the evidence method →