| Ecosystem |
| 1 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 11 decomposed | 7 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Executes Cypher queries against Neo4j databases and provides Text2Cypher workflow capabilities that translate natural language prompts into executable Cypher queries using LLM reasoning. The mcp-neo4j-cypher server uses fastMCP v2.x with @mcp.tool decorators to expose query execution as MCP tools, integrating Neo4j AsyncDriver (>=5.26.0) for asynchronous database connectivity and Pydantic models for structured input validation and response formatting.
Unique: Integrates Text2Cypher as a first-class MCP tool workflow rather than a separate utility, allowing LLMs to iteratively refine queries within agent loops. Uses fastMCP v2.x @mcp.tool decorators to expose both raw Cypher execution and LLM-driven translation as composable MCP tools, with Pydantic validation ensuring type-safe parameter passing.
vs alternatives: Enables agentic query refinement loops directly within MCP context, whereas traditional Neo4j drivers require manual query construction or separate Text2Cypher services outside the agent loop.
Provides a Neo4j-backed memory system for AI agents that stores facts, relationships, and context as a persistent knowledge graph, enabling semantic search and retrieval across agent sessions. The mcp-neo4j-memory server implements a data model architecture that maps agent interactions into graph nodes and relationships, with search and retrieval tools that query the knowledge graph using vector embeddings or Cypher-based pattern matching to surface relevant context for LLM reasoning.
Unique: Implements memory as a graph structure rather than flat vector embeddings, allowing agents to reason over relationship patterns and entity connections. Uses Neo4j's native graph query capabilities to retrieve contextual subgraphs relevant to current agent state, combining pattern matching with semantic search for multi-dimensional retrieval.
vs alternatives: Outperforms vector-only memory systems for relationship-heavy reasoning because it preserves and queries structural relationships between facts, enabling agents to discover indirect connections and reason over graph patterns that vector similarity alone cannot capture.
Provides Claude Desktop integration through manifest.json configuration files that declare MCP server availability, transport mode, and connection parameters. Each server includes a manifest.json that specifies the server name, description, command to launch (stdio), and optional HTTP endpoint configuration. Claude Desktop reads these manifests to discover and connect to MCP servers, enabling seamless integration without manual configuration. The manifest pattern allows users to enable/disable servers and switch between local and remote deployments by editing configuration.
Unique: Uses manifest.json as a declarative configuration format for Claude Desktop integration, allowing users to enable/disable servers and switch between local/remote deployments without editing code. Manifest pattern is standardized across all four servers for consistency.
vs alternatives: Manifest-based configuration provides a user-friendly way to manage MCP servers in Claude Desktop, whereas manual configuration would require editing JSON files or environment variables; manifest approach is discoverable and self-documenting.
Enables AI agents and developers to design, validate, and visualize Neo4j graph data models through MCP tools that generate model definitions, validate schema constraints, and produce visual representations. The mcp-neo4j-data-modeling server integrates with Arrows (Neo4j's diagram tool) to export models as visualizations, uses Pydantic models for schema validation, and provides tools for Cypher generation from model definitions, allowing agents to reason about data structure and generate schema-aware queries.
Unique: Combines model design, validation, and visualization in a single MCP interface, allowing agents to iterate on schemas and immediately see visual feedback. Integrates Arrows as a native export target, enabling agents to generate shareable diagrams without manual tool switching.
vs alternatives: Provides agentic schema design with immediate visual validation, whereas traditional tools require manual diagram creation and separate validation steps; agents can propose, validate, and visualize models in a single loop.
Manages Neo4j Aura cloud database instances through MCP tools that authenticate with Aura API credentials and expose instance lifecycle operations (create, delete, pause, resume, update). The mcp-neo4j-cloud-aura-api server implements authentication patterns for Aura API, uses Pydantic models for request/response validation, and provides tools for querying instance status, managing backups, and configuring instance parameters without direct database access.
Unique: Exposes Aura cloud operations as MCP tools, enabling agents to manage infrastructure without direct API calls or CLI tools. Uses authenticated API patterns with Pydantic validation to ensure safe, type-checked instance management operations.
vs alternatives: Integrates Aura management directly into agent workflows via MCP, whereas manual CLI or API calls require external tool invocation and context switching; agents can provision infrastructure as part of task execution.
Provides flexible transport layer abstraction for all four MCP servers, supporting stdio (for direct process communication), HTTP with Server-Sent Events (for network access), and containerized Docker deployment. Built on Starlette middleware for HTTP transport, with CORS and TrustedHost security middleware, allowing a single MCP server implementation to be deployed across multiple transport modes without code changes. Configuration is managed through environment variables and config files, with Docker Compose templates provided for multi-server deployments.
Unique: Abstracts transport layer at the fastMCP framework level, allowing all four servers to support stdio, HTTP/SSE, and Docker deployment without server-specific code. Uses Starlette middleware for HTTP security (CORS, TrustedHost) and provides Docker Compose templates for multi-server orchestration.
vs alternatives: Single codebase supports multiple deployment modes, whereas traditional approaches require separate server implementations or transport adapters; teams can deploy the same server code locally, remotely, or containerized without modification.
Implements type-safe MCP tool definitions using Pydantic models for input validation and structured response formatting across all four servers. Each MCP tool is decorated with @mcp.tool and uses Pydantic models to define required/optional parameters, validate types, and provide schema documentation. Responses are formatted as structured JSON objects matching Pydantic output models, ensuring LLM clients receive well-typed, validated data that can be reliably parsed and acted upon.
Unique: Uses Pydantic models as the single source of truth for both input validation and schema documentation, eliminating duplication and ensuring schema and validation logic stay in sync. Integrates with fastMCP @mcp.tool decorator to automatically generate JSON schemas from Pydantic models.
vs alternatives: Provides automatic schema generation and validation from type annotations, whereas manual JSON schema definitions require separate maintenance and are prone to drift; Pydantic ensures schema and validation are always synchronized.
Integrates Neo4j's asynchronous driver (>=5.26.0) into MCP servers to enable non-blocking database operations that don't stall the MCP event loop. The Cypher and Memory servers use AsyncDriver with async/await patterns to execute queries concurrently, allowing multiple MCP tool invocations to query the database in parallel without blocking. Connection pooling and session management are handled by the driver, with configurable connection parameters (URI, auth, encryption) passed via environment variables.
Unique: Uses Neo4j AsyncDriver with async/await patterns to enable concurrent query execution without blocking the MCP event loop, allowing multiple tool invocations to query the database in parallel. Connection pooling is managed transparently by the driver with configurable parameters.
vs alternatives: Async driver enables true concurrent database access within a single MCP server process, whereas synchronous drivers would require thread pools or multiple processes; async approach is more efficient and integrates naturally with async MCP frameworks.
+3 more capabilities
Enables evaluation of AI systems' ability to perform chained mathematical operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, comparisons) across both structured tables and unstructured text extracted from SEC filings. The dataset provides ground-truth question-answer pairs where answers require synthesizing data from multiple locations within earnings reports and applying sequential arithmetic operations, testing whether models can decompose complex financial queries into discrete computational steps.
Unique: Combines real SEC filing documents (not synthetic) with crowdsourced questions requiring multi-step arithmetic, creating a hybrid dataset that tests both domain knowledge extraction and quantitative reasoning in a single evaluation task. Unlike generic math word problems, answers require locating figures within 10+ page documents first.
vs alternatives: More challenging than DROP or SVAMP because it requires financial domain knowledge AND document retrieval before arithmetic, whereas generic math benchmarks assume figures are already extracted
Assesses whether AI systems understand financial terminology, accounting concepts, and domain-specific metrics by requiring them to answer questions about real earnings reports from S&P 500 companies. The dataset tests recognition of financial line items (revenue, COGS, operating expenses, net income), ability to distinguish between different financial statements (income statement vs balance sheet), and understanding of financial ratios and metrics without explicit instruction on their definitions.
Unique: Uses authentic SEC filings rather than synthetic financial data, exposing models to real-world accounting variations, footnote complexity, and the actual structure of professional financial documents. This tests transfer learning from general text to specialized domain without domain-specific pretraining.
vs alternatives: More authentic than synthetic financial QA datasets because it uses real earnings reports with their inherent complexity, but narrower than general financial knowledge benchmarks because it focuses only on historical data interpretation
FinQA scores higher at 60/100 vs mcp-neo4j at 31/100. mcp-neo4j leads on ecosystem, while FinQA is stronger on adoption and quality.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Enables evaluation of AI systems' ability to extract numerical data from both structured HTML/text tables and unstructured prose within the same document, then reason over the extracted values. The dataset contains questions where relevant data appears in different formats — some figures are in formatted tables with clear row/column headers, while others are embedded in narrative text or footnotes — requiring robust parsing and entity linking before computation can occur.
Unique: Combines structured table data with unstructured narrative in the same evaluation, forcing systems to handle format heterogeneity and resolve references across different data representations. Most table QA datasets use clean, isolated tables; this tests real-world document complexity.
vs alternatives: More realistic than isolated table QA benchmarks (like SQA or WikiTableQuestions) because it requires handling narrative context and format mixing, but simpler than full document understanding because tables are already in text format (no OCR needed)
Provides a curated, crowdsourced-annotated dataset of 8,281 question-answer pairs with multi-step reasoning requirements, enabling systematic evaluation of AI systems on financial numerical reasoning. The dataset includes quality control mechanisms through crowdworker annotation, answer validation against ground truth, and coverage across diverse financial metrics and company types within the S&P 500, creating a reproducible evaluation standard for the financial AI community.
Unique: Provides a publicly available, reproducible benchmark specifically designed for financial numerical reasoning with real SEC filings, enabling standardized comparison across different financial AI systems. Most financial datasets are proprietary or synthetic; this is open-source and authentic.
vs alternatives: More specialized and challenging than generic QA benchmarks (SQuAD, MRQA) because it requires financial domain knowledge and multi-step arithmetic, but narrower in scope than comprehensive financial understanding benchmarks because it focuses only on numerical reasoning
Assesses AI systems' ability to perform multi-hop reasoning by requiring them to locate and combine information from different sections of earnings reports. Questions may require finding a figure in the income statement, then locating a related metric in the balance sheet, then performing arithmetic across both — testing whether models can maintain context across document boundaries and understand relationships between different financial statement sections.
Unique: Embeds multi-hop reasoning requirements within authentic financial documents where hops correspond to real relationships between financial statement sections, rather than synthetic reasoning chains. This tests whether models understand domain structure, not just generic multi-hop patterns.
vs alternatives: More realistic than synthetic multi-hop datasets (HotpotQA, 2WikiMultiHopQA) because reasoning hops follow actual financial relationships, but less controlled because document structure varies and reasoning paths are implicit rather than explicitly annotated
Enables evaluation of whether AI systems can identify which arithmetic operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, comparison) are required to answer financial questions, then execute them correctly. The dataset implicitly tests operation selection — a question asking 'what is the profit margin' requires division (net income / revenue), while 'what is total assets' requires addition — forcing models to understand financial semantics before applying math.
Unique: Embeds arithmetic operation selection within financial domain context, requiring models to understand that 'margin' semantically maps to division and 'total' maps to addition. This tests semantic grounding of operations, not just arithmetic execution.
vs alternatives: More semantically grounded than generic math word problem datasets because operation selection is implicit in financial terminology, but less explicit than datasets with annotated operation types because operations must be inferred
Provides evaluation capability for AI systems to compare financial metrics across multiple S&P 500 companies or aggregate metrics across different time periods within the same company's earnings reports. While individual questions reference single documents, the dataset structure enables evaluation of systems that can retrieve and compare relevant companies, requiring understanding of which metrics are comparable across entities and how to normalize for company size or accounting differences.
Unique: Provides a foundation for evaluating cross-company financial comparison by including diverse S&P 500 companies with different business models and scales, enabling assessment of whether systems can normalize and compare metrics appropriately. Most financial QA datasets focus on single-document questions.
vs alternatives: Enables cross-company evaluation unlike single-document QA datasets, but requires external retrieval and comparison logic because the dataset itself contains only single-document questions