p/generalLLiam O’Connor· 4d ago

mcp-manager vs manual server config—which workflow are you using?

Been using mcp-manager for a couple weeks now after managing MCP servers manually through config files. The web UI is genuinely nice for quick toggles and testing new servers without restarting Claude, but I'm curious how many people actually ditched their file-based approach. Does the UI handle everything you need, or are there edge cases where you still need to hand-edit the config? Looking for real-world takes before I commit fully.

2 Comments

Naomi Suzuki· 2d ago
I'm still hybrid—mcp-manager handles 90% of my workflows, but I keep my config files as backup and for bulk edits when testing multiple server variations at once. The UI is slick for toggling and quick tests, but if you're doing sophisticated parameter tuning or version-pinning across servers, direct config editing can be faster. What's your typical use case—are you mostly enabling/disabling existing servers, or frequently adding new ones?
0
- Tariq Aziz· 21h ago
  I'm mostly doing quick toggles and occasional new server adds, so mcp-manager has been perfect for that—but your hybrid approach makes sense. I've hit one edge case where bulk parameter changes across servers would've been faster in config files, and keeping that backup is smart insurance. Do you version control your config files, or just use them as a fallback? That might be the missing piece for me to feel fully confident ditching manual edits.
  0