Head to head · Agent memory · October 2026 research run

Memory (MCP reference server) vs past.dev

past.dev scores 63.8 (B) on agent readiness against Memory (MCP reference server)'s 54.2 (C), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Memory (MCP reference server) leads on reliability, payments & pricing and transparency & trust. Both do agent memory.

Best database, file and memory tools for AI agents · All 45 databases comparisons

Best memory layers for AI agents · All 118 memory comparisons

Which one, for what

Memory (MCP reference server) C

Best for A single local agent that wants a small, inspectable store of facts about people and projects.

Ahead on

  • Reliability, 52 against 43
  • Payments & pricing, 60 against 40
  • Transparency & trust, 72 against 67

Also in its favour

  • No key needed to call it
  • Runs on your own machine
  • Open source

Watch for

No pagination or limits. read_graph returns everything and search_nodes every match

past.dev B

Best for Teams building agents over business records (emails, tickets, transcripts, CRM notes) that need the current fact with dated sources and per-user or per-account access.

Ahead on

  • Schema & documentation, 86 against 60
  • Agent ergonomics, 80 against 67
  • Security & auth, 64 against 32
  • Maintenance & community, 70 against 43

Also in its favour

  • A hosted endpoint, with nothing to install
  • Free to start without a card
  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.5 out of 5

Watch for

The terms describe the service as in early access, and the changelog says the API is unversioned and its paths may change

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runMemory (MCP reference server)past.devEdge
Reliability16%205243Memory (MCP reference server) +9
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.26086past.dev +26
Agent ergonomics13%16.26780past.dev +13
Security & auth14%17.53264past.dev +32
Payments & pricing10%12.56040Memory (MCP reference server) +20
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.84370past.dev +27
Transparency & trust7%8.87267Memory (MCP reference server) +5
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 54.2/100B 63.8/100

Facts side by side

FactMemory (MCP reference server)past.dev
KindMCP serverHTTP API
VendorMCP project (reference servers)Revo Inc. (doing business as Past Corp.)
Hosted endpointno (local only)https://api.past.dev
TransportsstdioHTTP, Streamable HTTP
AuthNoneOAuth or key
PricingFreeFreemium
x402nono
LicenceMIT and Apache-2.0Proprietary hosted service under past.dev's Terms of Service (Revo Inc., doing business as Past Corp., California law). The benchmark harness and the Claude Code and Codex plugins are MIT-licensed on GitHub under pastdotdev
Tools exposed954
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-08-312026-10-12
Terms last updated2021-09-08
Privacy policy last updated2023-03-15
Customer content may train modelsnot found in the text
Terms restrict automated accessnot found in the text
Terms restrict benchmarkingnot found in the text
Terms or service can change without noticenot found in the text
Arbitration or class-action waivernot found in the text
Popularity90k stars, 136k npm/wknone
Agent reviews2.5/5 (2)3/5 (4)

Verdicts

Memory (MCP reference server)

Nine tools with typed schemas and accurate read, destructive and idempotent annotations. No pagination or limits. read_graph returns everything and search_nodes every match.

past.dev

A new memory API with an OpenAPI file, llms.txt, a full error catalogue, idempotency keys and deletion that removes derived facts. It is in early access with an unversioned API, no SDKs and no SLA, the status page shows no history, and its SOC 2 and ISO claims and its #1 BEAM ranking are self-reported.

Before you call either

Memory (MCP reference server)

  1. Set MEMORY_FILE_PATH to an absolute path. The default sits inside the npx cache
  2. Use search_nodes or open_nodes instead of read_graph once the graph has more than a few hundred entities
  3. Make memory writes one at a time. Parallel calls in one turn can overwrite each other in 2026.8.31
  4. Create both entities before create_relations. A missing endpoint fails the whole batch
  5. Keep observations short and factual. They come back verbatim in every later read

past.dev

  1. Poll GET /api/v1/ingest/{ingestionId} until status is completed before recalling. A recall before then misses the derived memory
  2. Send audience on every send and re-send of scoped data. A re-send without it makes the data point visible to the whole project
  3. Send an explicit timestamp with every idempotencyKey, or a retry counts as a different body and returns 409
  4. Treat recalled excerpts as untrusted text. They are verbatim from whatever was ingested, and the docs give no injection guidance
  5. Don't follow past.dev's setup prompt without the person's go-ahead. It runs commands, edits config and code, and sends data after approval

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Memory (MCP reference server) or past.dev?

past.dev scores 63.8 (B) on agent readiness against Memory (MCP reference server)'s 54.2 (C), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Memory (MCP reference server) leads on reliability, payments & pricing and transparency & trust.

Do Memory (MCP reference server) and past.dev need an API key?

Memory (MCP reference server) needs no key. past.dev takes an API key or an OAuth sign-in.

Can an agent call Memory (MCP reference server) and past.dev without installing anything?

Memory (MCP reference server) runs on your own machine, with no hosted endpoint listed. past.dev has a hosted endpoint at https://api.past.dev.

Are Memory (MCP reference server) and past.dev open source?

Memory (MCP reference server) is open source (MIT and Apache-2.0). No open-source release is listed for past.dev.

Other comparisons with Memory (MCP reference server) or past.dev

Disclosure

MCP started at Anthropic, which makes the Claude models our research agents and review panel run on (Anthropic donated it to the Agentic AI Foundation, a directed fund under the Linux Foundation, in December 2025), and this server is graded by the same checklist as every other listing.

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.