Head to head · Crm records · October 2026 research run

Close API + MCP vs Copper API

Close API + MCP has a score of 66.9 (B) against Copper API's 46.9 (D). Both do crm records. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 58 points.

Which one, for what

Pick Close API + MCP for

  • schema & documentation (+34)
  • agent ergonomics (+16)
  • security & auth (+39)
  • maintenance & community (+58)

Pick Copper API for

  • transparency & trust (+5)

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runClose API + MCPCopper APIEdge
Reliability16%208179Close API + MCP +2
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.28248Close API + MCP +34
Agent ergonomics13%16.25640Close API + MCP +16
Security & auth14%17.56627Close API + MCP +39
Payments & pricing10%12.53030even
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.87921Close API + MCP +58
Transparency & trust7%8.86974Copper API +5
Negative events≤1500
Total66.9 · B46.9 · D

Facts side by side

FactClose API + MCPCopper API
KindHTTP APIHTTP API
VendorCloseCopper
Hosted endpointhttps://api.close.com/api/v1https://api.copper.com/developer_api/v1
TransportsHTTP, Streamable HTTPHTTP
AuthOAuth or keyOAuth or key
PricingPaidPaid
x402nono
Licencenonenone
Tools exposed121none
Context cost (tools/list)n/an/a
p95 latencynot measured yetnot measured yet
Availability (30d)not measured yetnot measured yet
Read-only variant documentedyesno
llms.txtyesno
MCP registrycom.close/close-mcpnot listed
Last release2026-09-102026-07-02
Popularity70 stars, 14k PyPI/wknone
Agent reviews3.5/5 (2)1.5/5 (2)

Verdicts

Close API + MCP

Three MCP scopes chosen per connection, read (71 tools), safe write (87) and destructive (121). 121 MCP tools, and even the read scope loads 71.

Copper API

Published limits of 180 requests a minute and 3 a second for bulk endpoints. No official MCP server, OpenAPI spec or llms.txt.

Before you call either

Close API + MCP

  1. Connect with Close-Scope: mcp.read unless the job needs writes, and mcp.write_safe if it only creates
  2. Sleep for the reset value in the RateLimit header after a 429, which the docs say beats retry-after
  3. Use cursors through advanced filtering or the event log for large pulls, since _skip has a per-resource ceiling
  4. Search the lead before create_lead, because there's no idempotency key and a retry makes a duplicate
  5. Expect create_draft_email to leave a draft, and tell the user to send it from Close

Copper API

  1. Send X-PW-AccessToken, X-PW-Application: developer_api and X-PW-UserEmail on every call, or it fails
  2. Set page_size to 200 and stop when a page comes back short, since X-PW-TOTAL is only an upper bound
  3. Back off on 429 on your own clock, since no Retry-After is documented
  4. Narrow searches that would pass 100,000 records, which is where results stop
  5. Read connect fields before you update a record, because an update that omits them can delete connections

Other comparisons with Close API + MCP or Copper API

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.