Compare · Web Search
Fetch vs Firecrawl MCP Server
Fetch exposes 1 tools and adds about 235 tokens to every model turn. Firecrawl exposes 3 tools and adds about 4,383. Firecrawl costs 18.7× as much context. Measured by connecting to each server and counting its tool list, not from the README.
 Fetchmodelcontextprotocol |  Firecrawlfirecrawl | |
|---|---|---|
| Context tax | ~235 tok/turn(leaner) | ~4,383 tok/turn |
| Tools | 1 | 3 |
| Cost per 1,000 turns (Claude Sonnet 5.5, uncached) | $0.47 | $8.77 |
| Security score | 95/100 | 97/100 |
| Cold start | 3,873 ms | — |
| Runs | Local (stdio) | Local or hosted |
| Needs keys | None declared | FIRECRAWL_API_KEY |
| Freshness | Active | Active |
| GitHub stars | 91k | 7.6k |
| License | — | MIT |
| Official MCP registry | No | Yes |
Install in Claude Code
Firecrawl
claude mcp add firecrawl -e FIRECRAWL_API_KEY='<firecrawl-api-key>' -- npx -y firecrawl-mcp
Tools
By name, from each server's live tool list. The same name can still behave differently.
Only in Fetch · 1
- fetch
In both · 0
- none
Only in Firecrawl · 3
- firecrawl_scrape
- firecrawl_search
- firecrawl_parse
Questions
- Which uses fewer tokens, Fetch or Firecrawl?
- Fetch: its tool definitions take about 235 tokens per turn against 4,383 for Firecrawl (18.7× more). Tool definitions are resent on every model turn.
- Do Fetch and Firecrawl have the same tools?
- No tool names overlap: Fetch has 1 tools and Firecrawl has 3.
- Are Fetch and Firecrawl hosted or local?
- Fetch: local (stdio). Firecrawl: local or hosted.
Token counts use the o200k tokenizer on each server's tool definitions as an agent receives them; clients that load tools lazily pay less. Prices are Claude Sonnet 5.5 input at $2/MTok. Want to check one yourself? Run npx mcpskillhub test <package> — how it works.