| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 6 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Streams structured visual feedback events from AI coding agents to connected MCP clients via Server-Sent Events (SSE) or WebSocket transport, enabling live monitoring of agent state, tool calls, and reasoning steps. Implements an event-driven architecture where agents emit typed feedback payloads (execution start/end, tool invocations, code changes) that are captured and relayed through the MCP protocol without blocking agent execution.
Unique: Implements MCP as a dedicated feedback transport layer for agents rather than a generic tool-calling interface, using event-driven streaming to decouple agent execution from visualization concerns. Provides typed feedback schemas (execution lifecycle, tool invocations, code mutations) that map directly to agent internal state without requiring agents to implement their own logging infrastructure.
vs alternatives: Lighter-weight and more focused than general-purpose agent observability platforms (like LangSmith) because it specializes in real-time visual feedback via MCP rather than post-hoc analytics, reducing latency and integration complexity for IDE-based monitoring.
Intercepts tool calls made by AI agents during execution and exposes them as structured MCP resources or events, allowing clients to visualize tool invocation sequences, arguments, and results in real-time. Works by wrapping or hooking into the agent's tool execution layer to capture call metadata (tool name, input schema, output) and emit it through the MCP protocol without modifying the underlying tool implementations.
Unique: Exposes tool call interception as a first-class MCP capability rather than embedding it in a generic logging system, allowing clients to subscribe to tool events selectively and render them with domain-specific visualizations. Uses MCP's resource and subscription model to decouple tool monitoring from agent core logic.
vs alternatives: More granular than agent frameworks' built-in logging because it streams individual tool calls as discrete MCP events, enabling real-time visualization and filtering without requiring clients to parse unstructured logs.
Exposes the current and historical execution state of AI agents as queryable MCP resources, allowing clients to read agent context (current task, reasoning, code changes, file modifications) at any point during execution. Implements a resource-based model where agent state snapshots are registered with the MCP server and can be queried or subscribed to for updates, providing a structured alternative to log-based debugging.
Unique: Models agent state as queryable MCP resources rather than streaming logs, allowing clients to pull state on-demand and build stateful visualizations. Separates state storage from event streaming, enabling both real-time feedback and historical analysis without requiring clients to maintain their own state reconstruction logic.
vs alternatives: More structured than log-based debugging because it provides typed, queryable state objects rather than unstructured text logs, reducing client-side parsing complexity and enabling richer IDE integrations.
Tracks file modifications made by AI agents during execution and exposes them as structured diffs or change events through MCP, enabling clients to visualize code changes in real-time or retrieve historical diffs. Implements file system monitoring or hooks into agent code-writing operations to capture before/after snapshots and compute diffs, which are then serialized as MCP events or resources.
Unique: Exposes code changes as first-class MCP events and resources rather than embedding them in generic execution logs, allowing clients to subscribe to code-change events selectively and render diffs with syntax highlighting or IDE-native diff viewers. Decouples change tracking from agent core logic via instrumentation hooks.
vs alternatives: More actionable than agent logs because it provides structured diffs and change events rather than text descriptions of modifications, enabling IDE integrations and automated code review workflows without client-side parsing.
Streams typed events representing agent execution lifecycle stages (start, step, tool-call, reasoning, completion, error) through MCP, allowing clients to build state machines or progress indicators based on agent activity. Implements an event emitter pattern where agents emit lifecycle events at key execution points, which are captured and relayed as structured MCP events with timestamps and contextual metadata.
Unique: Models agent execution as a typed event stream rather than a monolithic log, allowing clients to build reactive visualizations and state machines based on discrete lifecycle events. Uses MCP's subscription model to decouple event production from consumption, enabling multiple clients to monitor the same agent without interference.
vs alternatives: More composable than polling-based status checks because it uses push-based event streaming, reducing latency and allowing clients to react immediately to execution state changes without implementing polling loops.
Provides boilerplate and configuration utilities for initializing an MCP server instance that connects to AI agents, handling transport setup (stdio, SSE, WebSocket), resource registration, and event subscription management. Implements a factory pattern where developers configure agent feedback hooks and MCP transport options, and the server automatically wires up event handlers and resource endpoints without requiring manual MCP protocol implementation.
Unique: Provides a declarative configuration API for MCP server setup rather than requiring developers to implement MCP protocol handlers manually, abstracting transport and resource registration complexity. Uses a factory pattern to generate MCP resource endpoints from agent feedback schema definitions.
vs alternatives: Faster to integrate than building MCP servers from scratch because it provides pre-built transport handlers and resource registration, reducing boilerplate from hundreds of lines to a few configuration calls.
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 agentation-mcp at 20/100.
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