Airtable MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to Airtable MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceEnables comprehensive interaction with the Airtable Web API to manage bases, tables, and records. It supports advanced features like batch record operations, CSV import/export, attachment uploads, and webhook management.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides tools for AI assistants to interact with Airtable databases, enabling CRUD operations on Airtable bases and tables.1 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceProvides read and write access to Airtable databases, enabling LLMs to inspect schemas, search, create, update, and delete records, tables, and fields, as well as manage comments on records.1,916 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to perform complete CRUD operations on Airtable bases, tables, records, fields, and comments, with batch processing and file attachment support, plus enterprise-grade reliability features.1 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables comprehensive interaction with Airtable bases including record management with automatic type conversion for all field types. It supports batch operations, schema discovery, and secure authentication using Personal Access Tokens.10 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to interact with Airtable databases via natural language, supporting record CRUD, base listing, and schema exploration.8 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 32 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action (e.g., record, field, table, view, webhook) with clear purposes. Even similar operations like list_records, search_records, and advanced_list_records are well-differentiated through descriptions.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_record, list_tables, delete_view), with no mixing of conventions.
32 tools is on the higher side but justified by the broad coverage of Airtable's API (bases, tables, fields, records, views, webhooks) with CRUD and batch operations. The count is slightly excessive but still reasonable for the domain.
The tool surface covers most major operations including CRUD for records, tables, fields, views, and webhooks. Notable gaps include missing update_base, delete_table, and get_field, but core workflows are well covered.