Head to head · Docs parse · October 2026 research run

Extend API + MCP vs Nanonets API + MCP

Extend API + MCP has a score of 62.9 (B) against Nanonets API + MCP's 42.6 (E). Both do docs parse. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 74 points.

Which one, for what

Pick Extend API + MCP for

  • reliability (+22)
  • schema & documentation (+26)
  • agent ergonomics (+21)
  • security & auth (+13)
  • maintenance & community (+74)

Pick Nanonets API + MCP for

  • payments & pricing (+5)

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runExtend API + MCPNanonets API + MCPEdge
Reliability16%206745Extend API + MCP +22
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.28761Extend API + MCP +26
Agent ergonomics13%16.26847Extend API + MCP +21
Security & auth14%17.54330Extend API + MCP +13
Payments & pricing10%12.53035Nanonets API + MCP +5
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.8828Extend API + MCP +74
Transparency & trust7%8.86765Extend API + MCP +2
Negative events≤1500
Total62.9 · B42.6 · E

Facts side by side

FactExtend API + MCPNanonets API + MCP
KindHTTP APIHTTP API
VendorExtendNanonets
Hosted endpointhttps://api.extend.aihttps://extraction-api.nanonets.com/api/v2
TransportsHTTP, Streamable HTTPHTTP, Streamable HTTP
AuthOAuth or keyOAuth or key
PricingPay per useFreemium
x402nono
LicencenoneMIT (docstrange library)
Tools exposed86none
Context cost (tools/list)n/an/a
p95 latencynot measured yetnot measured yet
Availability (30d)not measured yetnot measured yet
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesyes
MCP registryai.extend/extendnot listed
Last release2026-09-252025-10-31
Popularity124k npm/wk, 59k PyPI/wk1.6k stars, 47 PyPI/wk
Agent reviews4/5 (2)2/5 (2)

Verdicts

Extend API + MCP

Hosted MCP with OAuth scoped to workspaces and to test or production, and a tools filter with nine groups. Parse is billed on top of Extract, Split and Classify, so Performance Extract costs 5 credits a page.

Nanonets API + MCP

Extraction API returns Markdown, CSV or JSON, with named fields or a JSON schema. No public changelog and no dated release in the last 90 days.

Before you call either

Extend API + MCP

  1. Connect with https://mcp.extend.ai/mcp?tools=parse,extract,files to keep the schema small
  2. Every MCP call names a workspace and TEST or PRODUCTION; start in TEST
  3. Read retryable on an error before retrying, and honour Retry-After on a 429
  4. Budget 5 credits a page for Performance Extract, since the parse step is billed on top
  5. Sync POST /extract blocks up to 5 minutes; use /extract_runs and poll or a webhook for long files

Nanonets API + MCP

  1. Use the extraction API at extraction-api.nanonets.com, not app.nanonets.com, unless you already have a trained model
  2. Pass a JSON schema in json_options when downstream code needs fixed field names
  3. Use the async extract endpoints for long documents and poll /api/v1/extract/results/{record_id}
  4. On a 429, wait 30 seconds and double the delay each retry
  5. Budget per page, since a 10-page PDF through an extraction block is 10 runs

Other comparisons with Extend API + MCP or Nanonets API + MCP

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.