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

Neon MCPSupabase MCP

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

Comparable alternatives

Azure MCP ServerMCP100 RecommendedChrome DevTools MCPMCP100 RecommendedContext7 MCPMCP100 RecommendedGrafana Cloud MCPMCP100 RecommendedGoogle MCP Toolbox for DatabasesMCP100 RecommendedPlaywright MCPMCP100 Recommended

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence field	Neon MCPShortlist candidate	Supabase MCPMCP100 Recommended
Task fit
Best for	Manage Neon Postgres projects, branches, databases, migrations, and queries. Teams already using Neon that can test with non-sensitive data and least privilege.	Inspecting one Supabase project's schema, logs, advisors, and docs Development environments using project-scoped read-only access Teams that understand database and deployment consequences
Not ideal for	Users who need an MCP100-recommended recommendation today Unattended production workflows before permissions and failure behavior are reviewed	Production database administration by an unattended agent Users needing only public Supabase documentation Organizations unable to grant Supabase OAuth access to an MCP client
Avoid when	The connected data or account cannot be safely exposed to the selected AI client You cannot verify least-privilege access and review write-capable tool calls	The server would be left organization-wide rather than project-scoped Write-capable SQL, migrations, functions, branches, or storage changes cannot be human-approved Production secrets or customer records could be returned to the model
Provenance
Provenance details	First-party MCP Neon · Publisher source ↗	First-party MCP Supabase · Publisher source ↗
Maintenance
Maintenance details	Repo: Sep 14, 2026 Package: Sep 16, 2025	Repo: Sep 24, 2026 Package: Sep 21, 2026
Popularity evidence
GitHub stars	650 GitHub stars · checked 2026-09-24T00:00:00.000Z	2,919 GitHub stars · checked 2026-09-24T04:16:20.864000Z
Package downloads / 30 days	No reliable download data	406,869 package downloads / 30 days · checked 2026-09-24T04:17:50.300000Z
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✓ Streamable HTTP Claude Desktop✓ Streamable HTTP Codex✓ Streamable HTTP VS Code✓ Streamable HTTP Cursor✓ Streamable HTTP OpenCode✓ Streamable HTTP
Client coverage note	Local stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
Authentication	Authentication follows the publisher's documented endpoint or local-server configuration. OAuth scopes, API-key handling, and revocation behavior remain review items.	Hosted MCP uses browser OAuth and grants organization access to the MCP client. Project scope, read-only mode, and feature groups are encoded in URL query parameters. Enterprise-managed authentication is GA for eligible Team and Enterprise organizations. Access remains scoped to each user's existing Supabase role and permissions.
Cost	No MCP100 cost conclusion is published yet. The publisher's account plan, API usage, infrastructure, or per-action charges may apply.	The MCP server is open source; normal Supabase plan, database, branch, Edge Function, storage, and usage charges apply. Branching and some storage operations require a paid plan.
Permissions	Exact permissions and the read/write boundary have not yet completed MCP100 independent review; consult the linked publisher sources and use the narrowest available scope.	Without project_ref the hosted server can access all projects in the authorized organization. With project_ref it is limited to one project. read_only=true uses a read-only Postgres user for SQL and disables listed mutation tools. Feature groups can further narrow exposed tools.
Data handling	Publisher-accessible account or application data may be returned to the MCP client and its selected model. Retention and subprocess behavior require candidate-specific review.	Enabled tools may return schemas, table data from executed queries, logs, security/performance advisors, project metadata, publishable keys, types, and Edge Function source. Hosted mode sends tool requests through Supabase's MCP service.
Limitations
Tradeoffs	First-party provenance and a clear task improve confidence, but do not replace an independent permissions and usability review. Client transport compatibility does not prove that authentication, scopes, failure handling, and every tool behave safely.	Project scoping removes account-level tools but materially reduces blast radius. Read-only mode disables mutations but also removes migration, deployment, branch, and storage configuration workflows. Branching and some storage capabilities require paid plans; the server is pre-1.0 and may change.
Risk context	Use a test workspace or non-production account, least privilege, read-only controls where available, explicit approval for mutations, and credential revocation after evaluation.	Unscoped or write-enabled access can affect every project in an organization, execute SQL, apply migrations, deploy functions, or manage branches. Always set project_ref and read_only=true first, minimize feature groups, and avoid production data.
Evidence date
Editorial review	2026-07-24	2026-09-05
Candidate evidence	2026-09-24T00:00:00.000Z	2026-09-24T04:25:05.554391Z

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

Read the evidence method →