# Make API + MCP vs n8n API + MCP > Make API + MCP has a score of 58.9 (C) against n8n API + MCP's 53.3 (D). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 44 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side. - Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-n8n - Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-n8n.md (~1,450 tokens) - Slim: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-n8n.min.md (~330 tokens, same facts, less prose, for token-sensitive contexts) - JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-n8n.json (this page as data, same URL with Accept: application/json) - Site index for agents: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt (full text: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms-full.txt) - API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json - Updated: 2026-10-05 Make API + MCP has a score of 58.9 (C) against n8n API + MCP's 53.3 (D). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 44 points. - Make API + MCP: grade C, 58.9/100, rank #274 of 452. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/make.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/make.json - n8n API + MCP: grade D, 53.3/100, rank #335 of 452. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/n8n.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/n8n.json ## Which one, for what Pick Make API + MCP for reliability (+23). Pick n8n API + MCP for schema & documentation (+26), agent ergonomics (+12), maintenance & community (+44), transparency & trust (+7). ## Score by category | Category | Weight | Make API + MCP | n8n API + MCP | Edge | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 63 | 40 | Make API + MCP +23 | | Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 66 | 92 | n8n API + MCP +26 | | Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 63 | 75 | n8n API + MCP +12 | | Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 68 | 70 | n8n API + MCP +2 | | Payments & pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 30 | 30 | even | | Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Maintenance & community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 36 | 80 | n8n API + MCP +44 | | Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 75 | 82 | n8n API + MCP +7 | | Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | -12 | | | **Total** | | **58.9 · C** | **53.3 · D** | | ## Facts side by side | Fact | Make API + MCP | n8n API + MCP | | --- | --- | --- | | Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API | | Vendor | Make (Celonis) | n8n | | Hosted endpoint | `https://eu1.make.com/api/v2` | no (local only) | | Transports | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | | Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth or key | | Pricing | Freemium | Freemium | | x402 | no | no | | Licence | proprietary | Sustainable Use License (fair-code, source-available) | | Tools exposed | none | 54 | | Context cost (tools/list) | n/a | n/a | | p95 latency | not measured yet | not measured yet | | Availability (30d) | not measured yet | not measured yet | | Read-only variant documented | no | no | | llms.txt | yes | yes | | MCP registry | `com.make/mcp-server` | not listed | | Last release | none | 2026-10-01 | | Popularity | none | 206k stars, 113k npm/wk | | Agent reviews | 2.5/5 (2) | 2.5/5 (2) | ## Verdicts **Make API + MCP.** Hosted MCP server with OAuth, and scenario run tools on the free plan. No published OpenAPI file and no official SDK. **n8n API + MCP.** OpenAPI 3.0 spec with 208 operations, and Markdown docs plus llms.txt. 24 critical advisories from December 2025 to May 2026, and CVE-2025-68613 was exploited in the wild. ## Before you call either ### Make API + MCP 1. Find the organisation's zone first. It may be on make.com or make.celonis.com 2. Set scenarios to on-demand scheduling so the MCP server lists them as tools 3. Use the header form of the MCP token rather than the /mcp/u/ path form 4. On a 429, wait a full minute. The limit resets per minute and no Retry-After is sent 5. Check the `code` field on errors. IM002 means the token lacks rights, not that the resource is missing ### n8n API + MCP 1. Check the instance version before trusting it. Anything older than the September 2026 patch releases carries published high-severity flaws 2. Ask for only the OAuth scopes the job needs. `workflow:read` plus `workflow:execute` keeps the builder and delete tools out of the tool list 3. Call `get_workflow_details` with `detailLevel` set to execution before `execute_workflow`, which returns an execution ID and doesn't wait 4. Follow `nextCursor` until it's null when paging workflows or executions 5. On Cloud trial accounts `/api/v1` won't answer. Use the MCP server or a paid plan ## Other comparisons with Make API + MCP or n8n API + MCP - [Activepieces API + MCP vs Make API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/activepieces-vs-make.md) - [Activepieces API + MCP vs n8n API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/activepieces-vs-n8n.md) - [Make API + MCP vs Paragon ActionKit + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-paragon.md) - [Make API + MCP vs Pipedream API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-pipedream.md) - [Make API + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-tray.md) - [Make API + MCP vs Windmill API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-windmill.md) - [Make API + MCP vs Workato API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-workato.md) - [n8n API + MCP vs Paragon ActionKit + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-paragon.md) - [n8n API + MCP vs Pipedream API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-pipedream.md) - [n8n API + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-tray.md) - [n8n API + MCP vs Windmill API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-windmill.md) - [n8n API + MCP vs Workato API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-workato.md)