| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Capabilities | 13 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Provides a no-code canvas interface for constructing LLM agent workflows by connecting pre-built blocks (LLM calls, tool integrations, data transformations, branching logic) without writing code. The builder likely uses a directed acyclic graph (DAG) execution model where each block represents a discrete step, with data flowing between blocks via typed connections. Users define agent behavior through visual composition rather than imperative code.
Unique: Combines visual DAG-based workflow composition with LLM-specific blocks (prompt templates, model selection, tool binding) in a single canvas, rather than requiring separate orchestration tools or code frameworks
vs alternatives: Faster than code-first frameworks (Langchain, AutoGen) for non-technical users to prototype agents, but less flexible than programmatic approaches for complex conditional logic
Abstracts away provider-specific API differences (OpenAI, Anthropic, Cohere, local models) behind a unified interface, allowing users to swap LLM providers or models within an agent without rebuilding the workflow. Likely implements a provider adapter pattern where each LLM provider has a standardized wrapper that normalizes request/response formats, token counting, and error handling.
Unique: Implements a unified LLM interface that normalizes request/response schemas across fundamentally different provider APIs (OpenAI's chat completions vs Anthropic's messages API), enabling true provider interchangeability within workflows
vs alternatives: More flexible than single-provider frameworks (OpenAI SDK) but less feature-complete than specialized provider SDKs for accessing cutting-edge provider-specific capabilities
Provides a library of pre-built agent templates for common use cases (customer support, data analysis, content generation, etc.), allowing users to clone and customize templates rather than building from scratch. Templates include pre-configured workflows, prompts, tools, and parameters. Likely stored in a template marketplace with metadata (use case, required tools, difficulty level) and versioning.
Unique: Provides a curated library of agent templates that can be cloned and customized, reducing time-to-value for common agent use cases and providing learning examples
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic code examples because templates are executable and customizable within the platform, but less comprehensive than specialized domain-specific agent frameworks
Supports team collaboration on agent development through shared workspaces, allowing multiple users to view, edit, and deploy agents together. Likely implements role-based access control (RBAC) to manage permissions (viewer, editor, admin) and activity logs to track who made changes. May include commenting or annotation features for feedback on agent definitions.
Unique: Implements team-level access control and activity tracking for agent definitions, enabling safe collaborative development with audit trails and permission enforcement
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic collaboration tools (Google Docs, GitHub) because it understands agent-specific workflows and permissions, but less sophisticated than enterprise collaboration platforms
Allows users to write custom code (Python, JavaScript, etc.) as a step within an agent workflow, bridging the gap between no-code and code-based approaches. Custom code blocks can access workflow context (previous step outputs, agent inputs) and return results that flow to subsequent steps. Likely executes code in a sandboxed environment with timeout and resource limits for safety.
Unique: Allows inline custom code execution within visual workflows, with automatic context injection and sandboxing, enabling hybrid no-code/code development without leaving the platform
vs alternatives: More integrated than external code execution (Lambda, Cloud Functions) because code runs within the workflow context, but less flexible than full programmatic frameworks for complex logic
Provides a registry of pre-configured integrations (REST APIs, databases, third-party services) that agents can invoke as tools. Uses a schema-based approach where each tool is defined by its input/output schema, allowing the LLM to understand what parameters it accepts and what it returns. Likely implements automatic schema generation from OpenAPI specs or manual schema definition, with runtime binding to actual API endpoints.
Unique: Centralizes tool definitions and credentials in a schema registry, allowing agents to dynamically discover and invoke tools without embedding API details in workflow definitions, with automatic schema-to-LLM-function-call translation
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic API clients (Postman, Insomnia) because it binds tools directly to agent reasoning, but less flexible than custom code for handling non-standard API patterns
Provides a prompt template system where users define reusable prompt structures with placeholders for dynamic variables (user input, context, data from previous steps). Supports versioning of prompts, allowing teams to iterate on prompt wording and compare performance across versions. Likely stores templates in a database with metadata (version history, performance metrics, tags) and substitutes variables at runtime using a simple templating engine.
Unique: Treats prompts as first-class versioned artifacts with metadata and performance tracking, rather than inline strings in code, enabling systematic prompt iteration and reuse across agents
vs alternatives: More structured than ad-hoc prompt management in notebooks or code, but less sophisticated than specialized prompt optimization platforms (PromptOps tools) that include automated testing
Executes agent workflows step-by-step, capturing detailed logs at each step (LLM input/output, tool calls, latency, errors). Provides a dashboard or UI to monitor running agents, view execution history, and debug failures. Likely implements a state machine for agent execution where each step is tracked with timestamps, inputs, outputs, and error information, stored in a database for later analysis.
Unique: Captures execution state at each workflow step (LLM calls, tool invocations, data transformations) with full input/output visibility, enabling deterministic replay and forensic debugging of agent behavior
vs alternatives: More agent-specific than generic application logging (ELK, Datadog) because it understands LLM-specific metrics (token usage, model selection, tool invocation patterns)
+5 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 LLM Stack at 22/100. LLM Stack leads on quality, while Supabase is stronger on ecosystem. Supabase also has a free tier, making it more accessible.
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