| Ecosystem | 1 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 5 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Enables Claude and other MCP clients to send SMS messages through the Sendblue API by exposing a standardized MCP tool interface that handles authentication, message formatting, and delivery status tracking. Implements the Model Context Protocol's tool-calling schema to abstract away Sendblue's REST API complexity, allowing LLM agents to compose SMS workflows without direct HTTP handling.
Unique: Wraps Sendblue's REST API as a native MCP tool, allowing Claude to invoke SMS sending through the MCP protocol's standardized tool-calling interface rather than requiring custom HTTP client code or API key management in the LLM prompt context.
vs alternatives: Cleaner than embedding Sendblue API calls directly in Claude prompts because it centralizes authentication and error handling in the MCP server layer, reducing token overhead and improving security by keeping credentials out of LLM context.
Implements the Model Context Protocol server specification to expose Sendblue SMS capabilities as a standardized tool endpoint that MCP clients (Claude, custom agents) can discover and invoke. Handles MCP message serialization, tool schema definition, and request/response lifecycle management according to the MCP specification.
Unique: Implements the full MCP server lifecycle including tool schema advertisement, request routing, and response serialization, making Sendblue SMS a first-class MCP tool rather than a custom integration.
vs alternatives: More standardized than custom HTTP endpoints because it follows the MCP specification, enabling automatic tool discovery and compatibility with any MCP-compliant client without custom adapter code.
Manages Sendblue API authentication by securely storing and injecting API credentials into outbound requests to the Sendblue API. Implements credential handling patterns that isolate secrets from MCP client context, preventing accidental exposure of API keys in LLM prompts or logs.
Unique: Isolates Sendblue API credentials at the MCP server layer, preventing them from being passed through LLM context or exposed in tool invocation logs, which is critical for security in agent-based workflows.
vs alternatives: More secure than embedding API keys in Claude prompts or storing them in conversation context because credentials remain server-side and never transit through the LLM, reducing attack surface for credential theft.
Captures and reports errors from the Sendblue API (invalid phone numbers, rate limits, account issues) and translates them into structured error responses that MCP clients can interpret and act upon. Implements error classification to distinguish transient failures (retry-able) from permanent failures (invalid recipient).
Unique: Translates Sendblue API errors into structured, retry-able error responses that MCP clients can programmatically handle, rather than returning raw API errors that require manual parsing.
vs alternatives: Better than raw API error passthrough because it classifies errors (transient vs permanent) and provides retry guidance, enabling agents to implement intelligent retry strategies without hardcoding Sendblue-specific error codes.
Defines the JSON Schema for the SMS sending tool, specifying required parameters (recipient, message), optional parameters, and constraints (phone number format, message length). Validates incoming tool invocation requests against this schema before forwarding to Sendblue, preventing malformed requests and providing early feedback to MCP clients.
Unique: Exposes Sendblue SMS parameters as a formal JSON Schema that MCP clients can introspect and use for parameter validation, enabling Claude to understand constraints (e.g., E.164 phone format) without hardcoding them in prompts.
vs alternatives: More robust than relying on LLM prompt instructions because schema-based validation is enforced at the server layer and catches malformed requests before they reach Sendblue, reducing API errors and token waste.
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 sendblue-mcp at 24/100. sendblue-mcp 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