| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 7 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Creates new tasks through the Model Context Protocol by exposing a standardized tool interface that LLM clients can invoke. The server implements MCP's tool definition schema, allowing Claude, other LLM agents, or MCP-compatible clients to define task properties (title, description, priority, due date) and persist them to a backend store. Works by registering task creation as a callable tool with JSON schema validation, enabling type-safe task instantiation from natural language or structured prompts.
Unique: Implements task creation as a first-class MCP tool rather than wrapping a REST API, enabling direct LLM invocation without intermediate translation layers or custom function definitions
vs alternatives: Simpler integration than REST API wrappers because MCP clients natively understand the tool schema without requiring custom prompt engineering or function definition boilerplate
Exposes tasks as MCP resources that clients can read and subscribe to, implementing the MCP resource protocol for standardized task retrieval. The server maintains a resource URI scheme (e.g., 'task://all' or 'task://filter?status=open') and returns task lists as structured JSON. Clients can request resources directly or subscribe to updates, enabling real-time task synchronization without polling. Uses MCP's resource subscription mechanism to push changes to connected clients.
Unique: Uses MCP's native resource subscription mechanism instead of polling or webhooks, enabling bidirectional real-time task synchronization as a first-class protocol feature
vs alternatives: More efficient than REST polling because subscriptions push updates server-initiated, and more standardized than custom WebSocket implementations because it leverages MCP's built-in resource protocol
Modifies existing tasks through MCP tool calls that apply atomic mutations (status changes, priority updates, due date modifications, description edits). The server implements optimistic locking or version-based conflict detection to prevent race conditions when multiple agents or clients update the same task. Updates are validated against the task schema before persistence, ensuring data integrity. Returns the updated task object with new timestamps and version identifiers.
Unique: Implements atomic task mutations through MCP tools with built-in conflict detection, rather than exposing raw database updates, ensuring consistency in multi-agent environments
vs alternatives: Safer than direct database access because mutations are validated and versioned, and more reliable than REST PATCH endpoints because MCP tool invocation is transactional within the protocol
Removes tasks from active view through MCP tool calls that implement soft-delete semantics (marking tasks as deleted rather than purging records). The server maintains a deletion timestamp and optional reason, preserving audit trails and enabling recovery. Hard deletion may be available through separate administrative tools. Deleted tasks are excluded from default list queries but can be retrieved through explicit archived/deleted task resources.
Unique: Implements soft-delete as the default deletion mechanism through MCP tools, preserving audit trails and recovery capability rather than immediate permanent deletion
vs alternatives: More operationally safe than hard delete because deleted tasks remain recoverable, and more compliant than immediate purge because deletion timestamps and reasons are preserved
Provides filtered task views through MCP resource URIs with query parameters (status, priority, assignee, due date range, tags). The server parses resource requests and returns filtered task subsets without requiring separate tool calls. Supports common filtering patterns like 'tasks://open', 'tasks://high-priority', 'tasks://due-today'. Filtering is performed server-side, reducing client-side processing and enabling efficient pagination of large task sets.
Unique: Implements filtering as MCP resource queries with predefined parameters rather than exposing a query language, balancing flexibility with security and simplicity
vs alternatives: More efficient than client-side filtering because filtering happens server-side with potential database indexing, and more secure than arbitrary query languages because filter parameters are whitelisted
Exposes the task data model schema through MCP's capability discovery mechanism, allowing clients to understand task properties, required fields, valid enums (for status, priority), and constraints without hardcoding. The server provides a schema resource or tool that returns JSON Schema definitions for task objects. Clients use this to validate inputs before calling task creation/update tools, and to render dynamic UIs based on the schema.
Unique: Provides task schema as a discoverable MCP resource rather than hardcoding it in documentation, enabling clients to adapt dynamically to schema changes
vs alternatives: More maintainable than API documentation because schema is machine-readable and versioned with the server, and more flexible than hardcoded clients because schema changes don't require client updates
Integrates task management into LLM agent planning loops by exposing tasks as contextual resources that agents read before deciding on actions. The server provides task state snapshots that agents use in chain-of-thought reasoning (e.g., 'I see 3 high-priority tasks, I should focus on the one due today'). Agents can invoke task mutations as part of multi-step plans, with the server tracking task state changes across plan execution. Enables agents to reason about task dependencies and sequencing.
Unique: Integrates tasks into agent planning loops as first-class context rather than external state, enabling agents to reason about task state as part of decision-making
vs alternatives: More effective for agent planning than separate task APIs because tasks are available as MCP resources within the agent's context window, reducing latency and enabling richer reasoning
Executes SQL queries against Supabase PostgreSQL instances through the Model Context Protocol, translating natural language or structured query requests into parameterized SQL statements. Uses MCP's tool-calling interface to expose database operations as callable functions with schema validation, enabling LLM agents to perform CRUD operations, joins, and aggregations with automatic connection pooling and credential management through Supabase client SDK.
Unique: Exposes Supabase PostgreSQL as MCP tools with automatic credential injection from Supabase client SDK, eliminating manual connection string management and enabling seamless LLM-to-database queries within Claude or compatible agents
vs alternatives: Tighter integration than generic SQL MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in authentication and connection pooling rather than requiring separate database credential configuration
Exposes Supabase Auth session state and user metadata through MCP tools, allowing agents to inspect current authentication context, retrieve user profiles, and trigger auth-related operations. Integrates with Supabase's JWT-based auth system to validate sessions and access user claims without re-authenticating, using the Supabase client's built-in session management.
Unique: Integrates Supabase's JWT-based auth system directly into MCP tool interface, allowing agents to inspect and act on auth state without managing separate credential stores or re-authentication flows
vs alternatives: More seamless than generic auth MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in session management and avoids redundant credential passing between agent and auth system
Invokes Supabase Edge Functions (serverless TypeScript/JavaScript functions) through MCP tools, passing parameters and receiving results with optional streaming support. Uses Supabase's edge function HTTP API to trigger functions with automatic authentication headers and response parsing, enabling agents to execute custom business logic without embedding it in the agent itself.
Supabase scores higher at 42/100 vs tasks at 23/100. tasks leads on ecosystem, while Supabase is stronger on quality.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Edge Functions as MCP tools with automatic authentication and response parsing, allowing agents to invoke custom serverless logic without managing HTTP clients or credential injection
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic HTTP MCP tools because it handles Supabase-specific authentication, error handling, and response formatting automatically
Subscribes to real-time changes on Supabase tables through MCP's event streaming interface, using Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY mechanism to push INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE events to agents. Maintains persistent WebSocket connections and filters events by table and row-level policies, enabling agents to react to database changes without polling.
Unique: Bridges Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY real-time system with MCP's tool interface, enabling agents to subscribe to database changes without managing WebSocket connections or event serialization
vs alternatives: More efficient than polling-based approaches because it uses Supabase's native real-time infrastructure rather than repeated database queries
Manages files in Supabase Storage buckets through MCP tools, supporting upload, download, list, and delete operations with automatic authentication and path-based access control. Uses Supabase's S3-compatible storage API with built-in support for public/private buckets and signed URLs for temporary access, enabling agents to handle file I/O without managing cloud storage credentials.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Storage's S3-compatible API as MCP tools with automatic authentication and signed URL generation, eliminating the need for agents to manage cloud storage credentials or generate temporary access tokens
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic S3 MCP tools because it leverages Supabase's built-in bucket policies and authentication rather than requiring separate AWS credentials
Performs semantic similarity searches on vector embeddings stored in Supabase PostgreSQL using pgvector extension, translating natural language queries into embedding vectors and executing cosine/L2 distance searches. Integrates with embedding providers (OpenAI, Cohere) or uses pre-computed embeddings, enabling agents to retrieve semantically similar documents or records without full-text search limitations.
Unique: Integrates pgvector directly into MCP tools with automatic embedding generation and distance calculation, enabling agents to perform semantic search without managing separate vector database infrastructure
vs alternatives: More efficient than external vector databases (Pinecone, Weaviate) for Supabase users because it colocates embeddings with relational data, reducing network latency and simplifying data synchronization
Exposes Supabase database schema information through MCP tools, allowing agents to discover table structures, column types, constraints, and relationships without manual schema documentation. Queries PostgreSQL information_schema and Supabase metadata tables to dynamically generate schema descriptions, enabling agents to construct valid queries and understand data relationships.
Unique: Queries Supabase's PostgreSQL information_schema directly through MCP tools, enabling agents to dynamically discover and adapt to database schemas without pre-configured schema definitions
vs alternatives: More flexible than static schema definitions because it reflects live database state, including recent migrations or schema changes
Enforces Supabase Row-Level Security policies within agent queries, ensuring that agents can only access rows permitted by RLS rules defined in the database. Evaluates policies based on authenticated user context (JWT claims, user ID) and applies WHERE clause filters automatically, preventing unauthorized data access at the database layer rather than application layer.
Unique: Delegates authorization enforcement to PostgreSQL RLS policies rather than implementing authorization in agent code, ensuring that data access rules are centralized and cannot be bypassed by agent logic
vs alternatives: More secure than application-level authorization because RLS is enforced at the database layer, preventing accidental data leaks even if agent code has bugs
+1 more capabilities