Field-by-field comparison

Compare the evidence before choosing an MCP.

Each signal stays separate, missing facts remain visible, and the column order follows your selection.

MCPs in this comparison

Uncheck an MCP to remove it. Comparing two or three keeps each signal in its own row.

Open canonical comparison link

Comparable alternatives

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence fieldcodaMCP100 SelectedExcel MCP ServerMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for
  • Collaborative document and structured-table workflows in Coda.
  • Reading, creating, formatting, charting, and updating XLSX workbooks and worksheets, including formulas and pivot tables
Not ideal for
  • Teams outside the publisher ecosystem or without least-privilege credentials
  • Workbooks that depend on full desktop Excel behavior, macros, or manual visual review
Avoid when
  • The connected identity is broader than the task requires
  • Tool calls cannot be reviewed before consequential mutations
  • You cannot restrict file access or are using a version affected by CVE-2026-40576
Provenance
Provenance details

First-party MCP

ecosystem:coda · Publisher source ↗

Community implementation

Haris Musa · Publisher source ↗

Maintenance
Maintenance details

Repo: Not documented

Package: Not documented

Repo: Apr 12, 2026

Package: Apr 12, 2026

Popularity evidence
GitHub starsNot documented

4,108

GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

External adoption evidenceNot documented
  • github: repository stars: 4,108Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
Client coverage
Client coverage details
Claude Code✓ Streamable HTTP
Claude Desktop✓ Streamable HTTP
Codex✓ Streamable HTTP
VS Code✓ Streamable HTTP
Cursor✓ Streamable HTTP
OpenCode✓ Streamable HTTP
Claude Code✓ Local stdio
Claude Desktop✓ Local stdio
Codex✓ Local stdio
VS Code✓ Local stdio
Cursor✓ Local stdio
OpenCode✓ Local stdio
Client coverage noteLocal stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
AuthenticationThe official hosted endpoint supports OAuth 2 and personal access tokens.Local stdio has no separate service authentication. Remote MCP authentication is not documented, so remote listeners must remain network-restricted.
CostThe MCP integration has no separately verified MCP100 price conclusion. Publisher subscriptions, API usage, compute, storage, and AI-client charges may apply.The MIT-licensed local server lists no usage fee; normal hosting, client, model, and network costs may apply.
PermissionsCoda document sharing, user permissions, admin controls, and OAuth or PAT scope determine access.The server can read, create, modify, format, chart, and delete workbook content. Remote modes confine relative paths to EXCEL_FILES_PATH in the patched release.
Data handlingAuthorized service data and tool results pass through the MCP server to the connected AI client. Review the publisher and client data policies before using sensitive files & knowledge information.Workbook paths and spreadsheet content are processed by the server and returned to the connected client as required by tool calls; publisher telemetry and retention are not documented.
Limitations
Tradeoffs
  • Documents and tables can contain broad internal knowledge, and write tools can alter shared operational records.
  • It provides deep spreadsheet manipulation without desktop Excel, but write tools can overwrite data and remote transports add network and filesystem exposure.
Risk contextDocuments and tables can contain broad internal knowledge, and write tools can alter shared operational records. Use a test environment where practical, least-privilege credentials, narrowly enabled tools, and explicit confirmation for mutations. MCP100 did not execute third-party server code during this documentation review.Versions through 0.1.7 have a critical path-traversal vulnerability. Use 0.1.8 or later, prefer stdio, restrict workbook paths, avoid public remote listeners, and keep recoverable backups.
Evidence date
Editorial review2026-07-302026-08-13
Candidate evidence2026-07-30T19:00:00.000Z2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

Popularity, maintenance, fit, permissions, and client support are independent evidence fields.

Read the evidence method →