| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Capabilities | 11 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Performs speech-to-text transcription on audio and video files using local machine learning models (likely Whisper or similar) that run entirely on-device without cloud API calls. The system handles multiple audio formats and video containers, extracting audio streams and processing them through a local inference pipeline that maintains privacy and eliminates per-minute API costs.
Unique: Runs transcription entirely locally using bundled ML models rather than requiring cloud API keys, eliminating per-minute costs and enabling processing of sensitive/confidential media without data transmission. Architecture likely wraps Whisper or similar open-source models with format detection and audio extraction pipelines.
vs alternatives: Cheaper than Otter.ai or Rev for high-volume transcription and maintains full privacy vs cloud-dependent tools like Descript or Adobe Podcast, at the cost of slower processing speed
Automatically detects and extracts audio streams from diverse video container formats (MP4, MKV, WebM, etc.) and normalizes audio to a standard format for downstream transcription processing. Uses container-aware parsing (likely FFmpeg or libav) to handle codec detection, stream selection, and format conversion without manual user configuration.
Unique: Abstracts away FFmpeg complexity with automatic codec detection and stream selection, allowing users to point at any video file without specifying extraction parameters. Likely uses container metadata parsing to intelligently select audio tracks and normalize to transcription-friendly formats.
vs alternatives: More flexible than Whisper CLI alone (which requires pre-extracted audio) and simpler than manual FFmpeg pipelines, though not as feature-rich as dedicated video editing tools
Exposes transcription functionality via HTTP REST API, allowing external applications to submit files for transcription and retrieve results. Supports asynchronous job submission, polling for status, and webhook callbacks for result notification. Likely uses a lightweight HTTP framework (Flask, FastAPI) with job queue integration.
Unique: Wraps local transcription engine with HTTP API, enabling remote access and integration without requiring users to run the tool directly. Likely uses FastAPI or Flask with async job handling.
vs alternatives: More flexible than cloud APIs for self-hosted scenarios, but requires infrastructure management vs managed services like Otter.ai
Processes multiple audio/video files sequentially or in parallel with real-time progress reporting, queue management, and error handling. Tracks transcription status per file, allows pause/resume, and provides detailed logs of successes and failures without requiring manual orchestration or external job queue systems.
Unique: Provides built-in batch orchestration without requiring external job queues (Celery, Bull, etc.), with pause/resume and per-file error isolation. Likely uses a simple in-memory or file-based queue with worker pool pattern for parallelism.
vs alternatives: Simpler than setting up Celery or cloud batch services for small-to-medium workloads, but lacks distributed processing and persistence of larger systems
Generates transcriptions with precise word-level or sentence-level timestamps, supporting multiple output formats (SRT, VTT, JSON) for subtitle generation and media synchronization. Preserves timing information from the speech model's output and formats it according to standard subtitle specifications or custom JSON schemas.
Unique: Automatically extracts and formats timing information from the speech model without requiring separate alignment tools. Supports multiple output formats from a single transcription pass, avoiding redundant processing.
vs alternatives: More integrated than post-processing with separate subtitle tools, and faster than manual timing adjustment in video editors
Automatically detects the spoken language in audio and selects the appropriate transcription model or language-specific parameters. Supports transcription of multiple languages without requiring users to manually specify language codes, with fallback handling for mixed-language content.
Unique: Integrates language detection into the transcription pipeline without requiring manual language specification, leveraging Whisper's built-in multilingual capabilities. Likely uses the model's internal language detection rather than a separate classifier.
vs alternatives: More seamless than requiring users to specify language codes manually, though less accurate than human-verified language selection for edge cases
Identifies and separates different speakers in audio, attributing transcribed segments to specific speakers with labels (Speaker 1, Speaker 2, etc.). Uses voice activity detection and speaker embedding models to cluster and distinguish speakers without requiring speaker enrollment or training data.
Unique: Integrates speaker diarization as a post-processing step on transcription output, clustering speaker embeddings to separate voices without requiring enrollment or training. Likely uses a pre-trained speaker embedding model (e.g., from Pyannote or similar).
vs alternatives: More accessible than commercial diarization APIs (Rev, Otter.ai) and works offline, but less accurate on complex multi-speaker scenarios
Provides a browser-based interface allowing users to drag-and-drop audio/video files for transcription without command-line interaction. The UI handles file upload, progress visualization, and result display, with optional export options. Likely runs a local HTTP server that processes files and streams results back to the browser.
Unique: Wraps local transcription engine with a web interface, eliminating CLI friction while maintaining offline processing. Likely uses a lightweight HTTP server (Express, Flask) with WebSocket or Server-Sent Events for real-time progress updates.
vs alternatives: More user-friendly than CLI tools like Whisper, but less feature-rich than dedicated web apps like Otter.ai or Descript
+3 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 45/100 vs Vibe Transcribe at 28/100. Vibe Transcribe 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