| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 10 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Provides a manually-maintained, hierarchically-organized directory of ChatGPT-related tools and integrations across 11 top-level categories (Apps, Web Apps, Browser Extensions, CLI Tools, Bots, Integrations, Packages, Articles, Community, Related Lists). Resources are classified via a decision-tree logic that assigns each entry to exactly one category based on hosting model (native OS, web-hosted, self-hosted, browser-based, terminal-based, or library-based) and primary function. The directory is stored as a single, version-controlled readme.md file with anchor-based navigation, enabling semantic search and category-specific filtering without requiring a database backend.
Unique: Follows the 'awesome project' convention with strict governance (submission requirements, code of conduct, PR template) and human-curated quality gates rather than algorithmic ranking or automated aggregation. Uses a single-file architecture (readme.md) with anchor-based category hierarchy, enabling version control and diff-based contribution review without requiring a database or build system.
vs alternatives: More discoverable and community-vetted than scattered blog posts or Twitter threads, but less searchable and slower to update than automated tool aggregators or AI-powered recommendation engines.
Organizes ChatGPT tools into 11 mutually-exclusive categories based on deployment model and access pattern: native OS apps (macOS, Windows, Linux), web apps (hosted/self-hosted), browser extensions (Chrome, Firefox, Safari), CLI tools (terminal-based), bots (Slack, Discord, Telegram), integrations (IDE plugins, editor extensions), API client packages (SDKs and libraries), articles, community discussions, and related awesome lists. Each resource is assigned to exactly one category via a decision tree that evaluates hosting model first, then primary function. This taxonomy enables developers to quickly filter tools by their deployment context (e.g., 'I need a CLI tool' vs 'I need a browser extension').
Unique: Uses a strict decision-tree classification logic (documented in DeepWiki Figure 3) that enforces one-to-one mapping between resources and categories, preventing ambiguity and enabling deterministic categorization. The taxonomy is explicitly designed around deployment model (how the tool is accessed) rather than feature set or use case, making it actionable for developers choosing tools based on their environment.
vs alternatives: More precise and environment-aware than tag-based systems (which allow multiple overlapping tags and create discovery ambiguity), but less flexible than faceted search systems that allow filtering by multiple dimensions simultaneously.
Implements a structured pull-request-based contribution workflow with submission requirements, code of conduct, and PR templates to maintain quality and consistency of the resource directory. Contributions are reviewed by maintainers against explicit criteria (factual accuracy, relevance to ChatGPT, no spam or self-promotion beyond reasonable bounds, proper formatting). The governance layer includes a code-of-conduct.md file defining community standards, a contributing.md file documenting submission rules, and a .github/pull_request_template.md file guiding contributors through the submission process. This approach decentralizes curation (community can propose additions) while centralizing quality control (maintainers approve merges).
Unique: Combines explicit submission requirements (documented in contributing.md) with a PR template (.github/pull_request_template.md) that guides contributors through the submission process step-by-step, reducing friction and improving consistency. The governance layer is version-controlled alongside the content, enabling transparent auditing of policy changes and community discussion via Git history.
vs alternatives: More transparent and community-friendly than closed-door curation (e.g., a single maintainer's personal list), but slower and more labor-intensive than algorithmic aggregation or automated feeds that require no human review.
Provides a curated subset of the directory focused specifically on command-line interface tools that interact with ChatGPT from a terminal environment. This sub-category includes ~23 CLI tools organized into five functional categories: general terminal access (assistant-cli, chatgpt), search and information retrieval (search-gpt), conversational sessions (chatgpt-conversation), code-focused utilities (stackexplain, aicommits for Git commits), and documentation generation (README-AI). Each CLI tool entry includes a repository link and brief description of its primary function. This enables developers to quickly discover terminal-based ChatGPT integrations without browsing the full directory.
Unique: Organizes CLI tools into five functional sub-categories (general access, search, conversation, code utilities, documentation generation) based on primary use case, enabling developers to find tools aligned with their specific workflow (e.g., 'I need a commit message generator' vs 'I need a general ChatGPT shell'). This is more granular than the top-level 'CLI Tools' category alone.
vs alternatives: More discoverable than scattered GitHub searches or Reddit threads, but less detailed than dedicated CLI tool registries (e.g., awesome-cli-apps) that include installation instructions, feature comparisons, and maintenance status.
Curates a subset of the directory (~40 entries) focused on web-based ChatGPT interfaces, including hosted web apps (third-party UIs for ChatGPT), self-hosted alternatives (open-source implementations that can be deployed on personal servers), and hybrid models (web apps with optional self-hosting). This category enables developers and non-technical users to discover alternatives to the official chat.openai.com interface, including privacy-focused options, feature-enhanced versions, and deployment-flexible solutions. Entries are organized by hosting model (hosted vs self-hosted) and include links to live demos or repositories.
Unique: Distinguishes between hosted web apps (third-party services) and self-hosted alternatives (open-source projects deployable on personal infrastructure), enabling users to filter by deployment model and control preference. This distinction is critical for privacy-conscious users and teams with data sovereignty requirements.
vs alternatives: More curated and community-vetted than raw GitHub searches, but lacks the structured metadata (features, pricing, deployment requirements) that would enable detailed comparison or automated filtering.
Provides a curated directory (~25 entries) of browser extensions, user scripts, and bookmarklets that integrate ChatGPT into web browsers. This category includes extensions for Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge that add ChatGPT functionality to web pages (e.g., sidebar access, context menu integration, page summarization). Entries are organized by browser compatibility and primary function (general access, content generation, research assistance, etc.). This enables developers and users to discover browser-based ChatGPT integrations without leaving their browsing environment.
Unique: Covers three distinct integration patterns (native extensions, user scripts, bookmarklets) in a single category, enabling users to find lightweight alternatives to full extensions if their browser or environment restricts extension installation. This breadth is unusual in awesome lists, which typically focus on a single integration pattern.
vs alternatives: More discoverable than browsing individual browser extension stores, but lacks the structured metadata (permissions, reviews, ratings) that extension stores provide, and does not track security or privacy certifications.
Curates a subset of the directory (~13 entries) focused on API client libraries and SDKs that enable developers to build ChatGPT applications programmatically. This category includes language-specific packages (Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Go, Rust, etc.) that wrap the OpenAI API or provide higher-level abstractions for ChatGPT integration. Entries include links to package repositories (npm, PyPI, crates.io, etc.) and brief descriptions of language, API style, and key features. This enables developers to quickly find the right library for their tech stack.
Unique: Organizes API clients by programming language and provides direct links to package repositories (npm, PyPI, crates.io), enabling developers to jump directly to installation and documentation without intermediate steps. This is more actionable than generic 'ChatGPT libraries' lists that lack language specificity.
vs alternatives: More discoverable than searching package repositories directly, but less detailed than dedicated SDK registries (e.g., OpenAI's official SDK documentation) that include API reference, examples, and version compatibility matrices.
Curates a subset of the directory (~17 entries) focused on ChatGPT bots and integrations for team communication platforms (Slack, Discord, Telegram, Microsoft Teams, etc.). This category includes both official bots (e.g., OpenAI's Slack bot) and community-built integrations that enable ChatGPT access directly within messaging apps. Entries are organized by platform and include links to bot repositories or installation instructions. This enables teams to integrate ChatGPT into their existing communication workflows without switching tools.
Unique: Organizes bots by messaging platform (Slack, Discord, Telegram, Teams) rather than by feature or architecture, enabling teams to quickly find integrations compatible with their existing communication infrastructure. This platform-first approach is more actionable than feature-based organization for team adoption.
vs alternatives: More discoverable than searching individual platform app stores or GitHub, but lacks the structured metadata (permissions, reviews, ratings) that platform app stores provide, and does not track security certifications or compliance.
+2 more capabilities
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 Awesome ChatGPT at 21/100.
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