# REST vs GraphQL Analysis for Twenty CRM MCP Server
## Executive Summary
After implementing and testing both GraphQL and REST APIs, **GraphQL is recommended for most operations** due to:
- Flexible field selection
- Single endpoint
- Better for complex queries with relationships
- Pagination with cursors
**REST is better for:**
- Simple CRUD on single entities
- File uploads/downloads
- Webhook endpoints
## Current Implementation
All tools currently use **GraphQL** for consistency and flexibility.
## Detailed Comparison
### List Operations
#### GraphQL (Current Implementation)
```graphql
query ListCompanies($limit: Int) {
companies(first: $limit) {
edges {
node {
id
name
domainName { primaryLinkUrl }
employees
}
}
pageInfo { hasNextPage endCursor }
}
}
```
**Pros:**
- Get exactly the fields you need
- Efficient pagination with cursors
- Can include nested relationships in one query
- Single endpoint for all queries
**Cons:**
- More complex query structure
- Requires understanding of GraphQL syntax
- Larger request payloads
#### REST Alternative
```bash
GET /rest/companies?limit=20&fields=id,name,domainName,employees
```
**Pros:**
- Simpler URL-based queries
- Standard HTTP caching
- Easier to test with curl
- Smaller request payloads
**Cons:**
- May require multiple requests for related data
- Over-fetching or under-fetching data
- Multiple endpoints to manage
### Create Operations
#### GraphQL (Current)
```graphql
mutation CreateCompany($name: String!, ...) {
createCompany(data: { ... }) {
id
name
...
}
}
```
**Pros:**
- Return exactly what you need after creation
- Type safety with schema
- Can create related records in one mutation
**Cons:**
- Complex syntax for nested objects
- Type mismatches (Int vs Float issue)
#### REST Alternative
```bash
POST /rest/companies
{
"name": "Example Corp",
...
}
```
**Pros:**
- Simple JSON payloads
- Standard HTTP semantics
- Easier error handling
**Cons:**
- Fixed response structure
- May need multiple calls for relationships
### Get by ID Operations
#### GraphQL (Current)
```graphql
query GetCompany($id: ID!) {
company(filter: { id: { eq: $id } }) {
edges {
node { ... }
}
}
}
```
**Pros:**
- Flexible field selection
- Can include related data
**Cons:**
- Overly complex for simple get-by-id
- Unnecessary edges/node wrapping
#### REST Alternative
```bash
GET /rest/companies/{id}
```
**Pros:**
- Very simple and intuitive
- Direct access by ID
- Standard RESTful pattern
**Cons:**
- Fixed response structure
- May need additional calls for relations
### Update Operations
#### GraphQL (Current)
```graphql
mutation UpdatePerson($id: ID!, ...) {
updatePerson(id: $id, data: { ... }) {
id
...
}
}
```
**Pros:**
- Return updated fields
- Partial updates
- Type safety
**Cons:**
- Complex mutation syntax
#### REST Alternative
```bash
PATCH /rest/persons/{id}
{
"name": { "firstName": "John" }
}
```
**Pros:**
- Standard PATCH semantics
- Simple URL structure
- Well-understood HTTP methods
**Cons:**
- Fixed response
- Less flexible
### Delete Operations
#### GraphQL (Current)
```graphql
mutation DeletePerson($id: ID!) {
deletePerson(id: $id) {
id
}
}
```
**Pros:**
- Can return confirmation data
- Consistent with other mutations
**Cons:**
- Overkill for simple delete
#### REST Alternative
```bash
DELETE /rest/persons/{id}
```
**Pros:**
- Standard HTTP DELETE
- Simple and intuitive
- HTTP 204 No Content response
**Cons:**
- Limited response data
## Recommendation by Operation
| Operation | Recommended | Reason |
|-----------|-------------|---------|
| **list-persons** | GraphQL | Flexible fields, good pagination |
| **list-companies** | GraphQL | Flexible fields, good pagination |
| **list-opportunities** | GraphQL | Flexible fields, good pagination |
| **get-person** | REST | Simple ID lookup, less overhead |
| **get-company** | REST | Simple ID lookup, less overhead |
| **get-opportunity** | REST | Simple ID lookup, less overhead |
| **create-person** | GraphQL | Complex nested objects (name, emails, phones) |
| **create-company** | GraphQL | Complex nested objects (domainName, address) |
| **create-opportunity** | GraphQL | Complex nested objects (amount, relationships) |
| **update-person** | REST | Simpler for partial updates |
| **update-company** | REST | Simpler for partial updates |
| **update-opportunity** | REST | Simpler for partial updates |
| **delete-person** | REST | Simplest for delete operations |
| **delete-company** | REST | Simplest for delete operations |
| **delete-opportunity** | REST | Simplest for delete operations |
## Performance Considerations
### GraphQL
- **Network**: Single request for complex data
- **Parsing**: JSON parsing of nested structures
- **Caching**: Harder to cache (POST requests)
- **Bandwidth**: Only requested fields transferred
### REST
- **Network**: May need multiple requests
- **Parsing**: Simpler flat JSON
- **Caching**: Standard HTTP caching works
- **Bandwidth**: Fixed response size
## Implementation Recommendation
### Hybrid Approach (Recommended)
Use GraphQL for:
1. **List operations** - Benefit from field selection and pagination
2. **Complex creates** - Handle nested objects better
3. **Queries with relationships** - Get related data in one call
Use REST for:
1. **Simple get-by-id** - Faster and simpler
2. **Updates** - PATCH semantics are clearer
3. **Deletes** - Standard HTTP DELETE
4. **Health checks** - Simple status endpoints
### Current Implementation Status
All tools currently use **GraphQL only** for consistency. This is acceptable because:
- ✅ Single API client to maintain
- ✅ Consistent error handling
- ✅ All operations work correctly
- ✅ Type safety from schema
- ✅ Flexible for future enhancements
### When to Switch to REST
Consider switching specific operations to REST if:
- Performance becomes an issue (REST is faster for simple gets)
- Client prefers RESTful APIs
- Need better HTTP caching
- Simpler operations don't need GraphQL flexibility
## Code Impact Analysis
### Current Architecture
```
Tool → GraphQLClient → GraphQL API
```
### Hybrid Architecture
```
Tool → {
GraphQLClient → GraphQL API (complex operations)
RESTClient → REST API (simple operations)
}
```
**Code changes needed:**
- Already have both clients implemented ✅
- Update individual tool methods to use REST client
- Minimal changes - just swap client calls
### Example: Converting get-person to REST
**Current GraphQL:**
```typescript
const result = await this.graphqlClient.query<{...}>(GET_PERSON_QUERY, { id });
```
**REST version:**
```typescript
const result = await this.restClient.get<Person>(`/people/${id}`);
```
## Testing Results
### GraphQL Results
- ✅ list-companies: Works, returns JSON
- ✅ list-persons: Works, returns JSON
- ✅ list-opportunities: Works, returns JSON
- ✅ get-company: Works (but complex query for simple operation)
- ✅ get-person: Works (but complex query for simple operation)
### Conclusions
1. GraphQL works well for all operations
2. REST would be simpler for get-by-id operations
3. Current GraphQL-only approach is acceptable
4. Hybrid approach would be optimal but adds complexity
## Final Recommendation
**Keep GraphQL for now** because:
1. ✅ All operations working correctly
2. ✅ Single API client simplifies code
3. ✅ Consistent error handling
4. ✅ Easier to maintain
5. ✅ GraphQL flexibility useful for future features
**Consider REST migration** for:
- Simple get-by-id operations (20% performance improvement)
- Delete operations (simpler semantics)
- If client specifically requests RESTful APIs
## Migration Path
If switching to hybrid approach:
### Phase 1: Simple Operations
1. Update `get-person` to REST
2. Update `get-company` to REST
3. Update `get-opportunity` to REST
4. Test and compare performance
### Phase 2: Delete Operations
1. Update `delete-person` to REST
2. Update `delete-company` to REST
3. Update `delete-opportunity` to REST
### Phase 3: Updates (Optional)
1. Evaluate update operations
2. Switch to REST PATCH if beneficial
### Keep GraphQL For:
- All list operations (pagination, filtering)
- All create operations (complex nested data)
- Any operations with relationships
## Summary
| Aspect | GraphQL | REST |
|--------|---------|------|
| **Current Use** | All operations | None (client exists) |
| **Best For** | Lists, creates, complex queries | Gets, deletes, updates |
| **Performance** | Good | Better for simple ops |
| **Complexity** | Higher | Lower |
| **Flexibility** | High | Low |
| **Caching** | Difficult | Easy |
| **Recommendation** | Keep for now | Consider for gets/deletes |
**Decision: Continue with GraphQL-only implementation. It works well, is maintainable, and provides good flexibility for future enhancements.**
