Framework comparison
A focused view of the differences that change what you can build: runtime, interactive UI, and multi-step workflows.
Core differences
Eight decision points across the leading MCP frameworks.
| Capability | bitmcpTypeScript | mcp-use v2TypeScript | xmcpTypeScript | FastMCPPython | MCP SDKTS, Python, Go, C# |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product scope | ServerFocused on MCP Apps | Full stackServer, client, agents | ServerPlus client codegen | Full stackServer and client | PrimitivesMaximum control |
| Interactive UI | Built inCompiled React Views | Built inReact Views | Built inReact widgets | Built inPrefab UI | ManualBuild the integration |
| 2026-07-28 core | Native | DefaultLegacy bridge included | Native2025 fallback included | SupportedAuto-negotiates | NativeIn the v2 SDK |
| Stateless HTTP | Default | Default | Default | Opt instateless_http | ManualYou implement it |
| stdio server | Includeddev --stdio | Not includedHTTP only | Included | IncludedDefault transport | Included |
| Confirmations | First classconfirm() + ctx.ask | ManualProtocol API | SupportedInput required | First classApproval providers | Manualinput_required |
| Preview / inspector | Built inApps preview | Built in/mcp/inspector | IntegratedMCP Inspector | Built infastmcp dev | ExternalMCP Inspector |
| Durable jobs | Built inHandle pattern | Bring your ownStorage required | Bring your ownStorage required | Built inBackground tasks | Bring your ownStorage required |