| 0 |
| Ecosystem | 1 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 13 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Enables developers to define safety policies, content filters, and validation rules using declarative YAML or JSON configuration files rather than imperative code. The framework parses these schemas at runtime and compiles them into executable guardrail chains that intercept and validate LLM inputs/outputs before they reach users or downstream systems. Supports conditional logic, regex patterns, semantic matching, and custom validator functions within a unified policy language.
Unique: Uses a declarative YAML/JSON schema approach for guardrail definition rather than imperative code, enabling non-developers to modify safety policies and providing version-controllable policy artifacts separate from application code
vs alternatives: More accessible than hand-coded validation logic and more flexible than hard-coded safety checks, allowing policy iteration without code deployment cycles
Implements a composable pipeline architecture that chains multiple validation stages (pre-processing, semantic analysis, syntactic checks, custom validators) to sanitize and validate both user inputs and LLM outputs. Each stage can apply different validation strategies: regex-based pattern matching, semantic similarity scoring against prohibited content vectors, PII detection, token-level analysis, and custom JavaScript functions. Stages execute sequentially with early exit on failure, and results include detailed violation metadata for logging and user feedback.
Unique: Combines syntactic (regex/pattern-based), semantic (embedding-based similarity), and custom validator stages in a single composable pipeline with early-exit optimization and detailed violation metadata, rather than applying single-layer validation
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than simple regex filtering and faster than full semantic re-ranking because it short-circuits on early validation failures rather than evaluating all stages
Automatically logs all guardrail violations with detailed metadata (timestamp, user ID, violation type, severity, enforcement action, conversation context) to enable compliance auditing and threat analysis. Supports structured logging to external systems (databases, logging services) and generates compliance reports summarizing violation patterns, enforcement actions, and policy effectiveness. Includes PII-safe logging that redacts sensitive information from logs while maintaining audit trail integrity.
Unique: Integrates comprehensive audit logging directly into the guardrail pipeline with PII-safe redaction and structured export for compliance reporting, rather than requiring manual logging implementation
vs alternatives: More complete than application-level logging because it captures guardrail-specific metadata and provides compliance-ready reporting, though requires external logging infrastructure for production deployments
Provides TypeScript interfaces and type definitions for guardrail configuration, enabling compile-time validation of policy definitions and IDE autocomplete for configuration options. Supports both YAML/JSON configuration files (with TypeScript schema validation) and programmatic configuration using TypeScript objects. Type safety extends to custom validator functions, ensuring they conform to expected signatures and receive properly typed context objects.
Unique: Provides full TypeScript type definitions for guardrail configuration and custom validators, enabling compile-time validation and IDE support rather than runtime-only validation
vs alternatives: Better developer experience than YAML-only configuration because of IDE autocomplete and compile-time error detection, though requires TypeScript knowledge and adds build-time overhead
Provides middleware adapters for popular Node.js frameworks (Express, Next.js, Fastify, etc.) that integrate guardrails into request/response pipelines. Middleware intercepts requests before they reach route handlers, applies guardrails to user input, and intercepts responses to validate LLM output before sending to clients. Supports both synchronous and asynchronous middleware patterns and integrates with framework-specific error handling and logging.
Unique: Provides framework-specific middleware adapters that integrate guardrails into request/response pipelines with minimal application changes, rather than requiring manual integration at each endpoint
vs alternatives: Easier to integrate into existing applications than manual guardrail calls at each endpoint, though adds latency to all requests and may be too late for some attack vectors
Detects prompt injection attempts by analyzing input structure, token patterns, and semantic anomalies that indicate attempts to override system instructions or manipulate model behavior. Uses techniques including delimiter detection (looking for common injection markers like 'ignore previous instructions'), instruction-like pattern recognition, and comparison against baseline input distributions. Can be configured with custom injection patterns and severity thresholds, and provides detailed reports on detected injection vectors.
Unique: Uses structural and pattern-based analysis to detect injection attempts rather than relying solely on semantic similarity, enabling detection of novel injection vectors and providing detailed attack vector identification
vs alternatives: Faster and more interpretable than semantic-only detection because it identifies specific injection patterns and markers, though less robust against sophisticated paraphrased attacks than ensemble approaches
Implements semantic content moderation by embedding user inputs and LLM outputs, then computing cosine similarity against pre-built vectors representing prohibited topics (violence, hate speech, sexual content, etc.). Uses OpenAI embeddings or custom embedding models to generate vector representations, compares against a configurable library of harmful content vectors, and returns similarity scores with configurable thresholds for blocking. Supports category-specific thresholds and allows whitelisting of legitimate uses of sensitive topics.
Unique: Uses embedding-based semantic similarity scoring against prohibited topic vectors rather than keyword lists or regex patterns, enabling detection of paraphrased harmful content and supporting category-specific thresholds
vs alternatives: More semantically aware than regex-based filtering and faster than full LLM re-evaluation, but slower and more expensive than keyword matching while being less robust than ensemble approaches combining multiple detection methods
Validates LLM outputs against JSON schemas or TypeScript interfaces to ensure responses conform to expected structure, data types, and constraints. Parses LLM text output, attempts to extract JSON, validates against provided schema using JSON Schema validators, and returns structured validation results with detailed error messages indicating which fields failed validation. Supports nested schemas, array validation, enum constraints, and custom validation functions for business logic (e.g., 'price must be positive').
Unique: Integrates schema validation as a guardrail stage in the output pipeline, enabling automatic rejection of malformed LLM outputs and providing structured error feedback for retry logic
vs alternatives: More reliable than manual JSON parsing and provides better error messages than try-catch blocks, though doesn't guarantee semantic correctness and requires LLM cooperation in output format
+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 @openai/guardrails at 33/100.
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