airtable-mcp-server
Related Servers
Alternatives to airtable-mcp-server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides read and write access to Airtable databases, enabling LLMs to inspect database schemas, then read and write records.1,673 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides tools for programmatically managing Airtable bases, tables, fields, and records through Claude Desktop or other MCP clients.12117 npm75MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA production-ready Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants and applications to interact with Airtable bases through a standardized interface with secure OAuth 2.0 authentication.103MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides LLMs with read and write access to Feishu Base (飞书多维表格) databases, enabling them to inspect schemas and manipulate records through natural language.22 npm10-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA production-ready MCP server for Airtable that enables programmatic management of bases, tables, fields, and records through Claude Desktop or other MCP clients using Effect for type-safe and robust API interactions.6 npm1MIT

MCP TapData Serverofficial
FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables Large Language Models to access and interact with database connections, including viewing schemas and performing CRUD operations on connected databases.-
TDQS
Scored across 16 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource+action pair (bases, tables, fields, records, comments, attachments). The closest pair, list_records vs search_records, is clearly separated by 'containing specific text' filtering, and list_tables vs describe_table are distinguished by list-vs-detail semantics.
All 16 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern. Verb variety (list, create, update, get, describe, search, upload, delete) is meaningful rather than chaotic, and no camelCase or mixed conventions appear.
16 tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but reasonable for a domain spanning bases, tables, fields, records, comments, and attachments. Each tool maps to a real Airtable operation rather than padding.
Coverage is decent for records (create/get/list/search/update/delete) and comments/attachments, but there are notable gaps: no delete_table, no delete_field, and no update/delete for comments. These missing lifecycle operations create dead ends agents may hit.