Side-by-side MCP server comparison
Short answer: it is close. Claude Flow scores 95/100 and io.github.Atomic-Mail/mcp scores 94/100 — a 1-point gap, which is inside the noise of a weekly rescore. Claude Flow exposes 4 tools against io.github.Atomic-Mail/mcp's 1, so the choice comes down to whether you need that extra surface area or would rather keep your context window small.
Last updated
| Metric | Claude Flow | io.github.Atomic-Mail/mcp |
|---|---|---|
| MCPpedia Score | 95 | 94 |
| Security Score | 30 | 29 |
| Maintenance Score | 20 | 20 |
| GitHub Stars | 68.9k | 266 |
| Weekly Downloads | 22.2k | 15547.2k |
| Tools | 4 | 1 |
| Est. Token Cost | 600 | 150 |
| Open CVEs | 0 | 0 |
| Health | Active | Active |
| Auth Required | No | No |
| Transport | stdio, sse, http | stdio, sse, http |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| API Pricing | unknown | freemium |
Claude Flow and io.github.Atomic-Mail/mcp are closely matched at the top with scores of 95 and 94. Claude Flow edges ahead on security. Check each server's detail page to decide which fits your use case.
Compare up to 4 servers: mcppedia.org/compare/server-a-vs-server-b-vs-server-c