Head to head
Cost Guard MCP vs Supabase
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Pre-flight query cost and result-size guardrails for AI agents on BigQuery, Snowflake, Databricks
Full listing
The short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Supabase (100/100 against 82). Supabase is hosted and callable through the gateway; Cost Guard MCP runs on your own machine. Supabase has noticeably more public adoption.
| Cost Guard MCP | Supabase | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | B82/100 | A100/100 |
| Adoption | New | Widely used |
| GitHub stars | 1 | 2.9k |
| Downloads / week | – | 76k |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Last release | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 |
| Category | Databases | Databases |