| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 8 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Exposes Atla's evaluation API through the Model Context Protocol (MCP), enabling AI agents to invoke evaluation workflows without direct HTTP integration. The MCP server acts as a bridge layer that translates agent tool calls into Atla API requests, handling authentication, request serialization, and response marshaling. Agents can dynamically discover available evaluation tools through MCP's tool discovery mechanism and invoke them with structured parameters.
Unique: Implements MCP as the integration layer for Atla evaluation, allowing agents to treat evaluation as a native tool rather than requiring custom HTTP clients. Uses MCP's tool discovery and schema validation to expose Atla's evaluation capabilities with type safety.
vs alternatives: Simpler than direct REST integration for MCP-based agents; provides standardized tool interface vs. custom API wrapper code
Enables agents to evaluate LLM-generated text against multiple evaluation dimensions (correctness, relevance, coherence, factuality, etc.) through Atla's evaluation engine. The server translates agent requests into parameterized evaluation calls that invoke Atla's backend models or custom evaluation logic. Supports batch evaluation of multiple outputs against the same criteria and returns structured scores with optional explanations.
Unique: Abstracts Atla's evaluation engine through MCP, allowing agents to invoke multi-dimensional evaluation without understanding Atla's API schema. Supports parameterized evaluation calls that map agent intents to Atla's evaluation dimensions.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than simple regex/heuristic evaluation; integrates with Atla's state-of-the-art models vs. building custom evaluation logic
Allows AI agents to compose multi-step evaluation workflows by chaining evaluation calls with conditional logic. Agents can evaluate intermediate outputs, use results to decide next steps, and iteratively refine LLM responses based on evaluation feedback. The MCP server handles request routing and maintains evaluation context across multiple calls within a single agent session.
Unique: Enables agents to treat evaluation as a first-class tool in agentic loops, allowing evaluation results to drive agent decision-making and iteration. MCP protocol ensures agents can discover and invoke evaluation at any point in their reasoning chain.
vs alternatives: More flexible than static evaluation pipelines; agents can dynamically decide when/how to evaluate vs. pre-defined evaluation workflows
Handles authentication, request signing, and API credential management for Atla API calls. The MCP server securely stores and injects Atla API keys into outbound requests, manages request/response serialization, and handles API errors with appropriate fallback behavior. Supports environment-based credential injection and secure credential rotation.
Unique: Centralizes Atla API authentication in the MCP server, preventing agents from needing direct API key access. Uses environment-based credential injection to separate secrets from agent logic.
vs alternatives: Cleaner than agents managing credentials directly; reduces attack surface vs. embedding API keys in agent prompts
Implements optional caching of evaluation results to avoid redundant API calls when the same LLM output is evaluated multiple times with identical criteria. The server maintains an in-memory cache keyed by output hash and evaluation parameters, returning cached results on subsequent identical requests. Supports cache invalidation and TTL-based expiration.
Unique: Implements transparent result caching at the MCP server level, allowing agents to benefit from deduplication without explicit cache management. Uses content-addressable caching (hash-based) to identify duplicate evaluations.
vs alternatives: Simpler than agents implementing their own caching; reduces API calls vs. no caching
Exposes Atla evaluation capabilities as discoverable MCP tools with full JSON schema definitions. The server implements MCP's tools/list and tools/call endpoints, allowing agents to dynamically discover available evaluation methods, their parameters, and return types. Schemas include parameter validation, required fields, and type constraints that agents can use for request construction.
Unique: Implements MCP's tool discovery protocol to expose Atla evaluation as self-describing tools. Agents can introspect available evaluation methods and their schemas without prior knowledge of Atla's API.
vs alternatives: More discoverable than hardcoded tool lists; enables dynamic agent adaptation vs. static tool configuration
Supports evaluating multiple LLM outputs in a single request, allowing agents to evaluate different outputs or the same output against multiple criteria efficiently. The server batches requests to Atla's API where possible and returns results in a structured format that maps outputs to their evaluation scores. Handles partial failures gracefully, returning successful evaluations even if some requests fail.
Unique: Implements batch evaluation at the MCP server level, allowing agents to submit multiple evaluations in a single tool call. Server handles batching logic and result aggregation transparently.
vs alternatives: More efficient than sequential individual evaluation calls; reduces latency and API overhead vs. one-at-a-time evaluation
Implements graceful error handling for Atla API failures, including retry logic with exponential backoff, timeout handling, and fallback evaluation strategies. When Atla API is unavailable, the server can optionally fall back to lightweight heuristic-based evaluation or return cached results. Errors are surfaced to agents with structured error messages and retry recommendations.
Unique: Implements multi-level fallback strategies (retry → cached results → heuristic evaluation) to ensure agents can continue operating during Atla API degradation. Provides structured error context to agents for decision-making.
vs alternatives: More resilient than direct API calls; agents can continue operating during outages vs. hard failures
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 Atla at 25/100.
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