# Make API + MCP vs Pipedream API + MCP > Pipedream API + MCP has a score of 65.8 (B) against Make API + MCP's 58.9 (C). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 43 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side. - Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-pipedream - Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-pipedream.md (~1,450 tokens) - Slim: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-pipedream.min.md (~330 tokens, same facts, less prose, for token-sensitive contexts) - JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-pipedream.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: 2026-10-04 Pipedream API + MCP has a score of 65.8 (B) against Make API + MCP's 58.9 (C). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 43 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 - Pipedream API + MCP: grade B, 65.8/100, rank #167 of 452. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/pipedream.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/pipedream.json ## Which one, for what Pick Make API + MCP for security & auth (+10). Pick Pipedream API + MCP for schema & documentation (+8), agent ergonomics (+10), payments & pricing (+10), maintenance & community (+43). ## Score by category | Category | Weight | Make API + MCP | Pipedream API + MCP | Edge | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 63 | 65 | Pipedream API + MCP +2 | | Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 66 | 74 | Pipedream API + MCP +8 | | Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 63 | 73 | Pipedream API + MCP +10 | | Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 68 | 58 | Make API + MCP +10 | | Payments & pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 30 | 40 | Pipedream API + MCP +10 | | Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Maintenance & community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 36 | 79 | Pipedream API + MCP +43 | | Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 75 | 78 | Pipedream API + MCP +3 | | Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | | | **Total** | | **58.9 · C** | **65.8 · B** | | ## Facts side by side | Fact | Make API + MCP | Pipedream API + MCP | | --- | --- | --- | | Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API | | Vendor | Make (Celonis) | Pipedream (Workday) | | Hosted endpoint | `https://eu1.make.com/api/v2` | `https://api.pipedream.com/v1` | | Transports | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | | Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth or key | | Pricing | Freemium | Freemium | | x402 | no | no | | Licence | proprietary | Pipedream Source Available License (components) | | Tools exposed | none | none | | 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 | 2026-09-02 | | Popularity | none | 12k stars, 587k npm/wk, 328k PyPI/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. **Pipedream API + MCP.** Managed OAuth per end user across 3,000+ apps, through API, SDK or MCP. Public changelog's last entry is 1 October 2025. ## 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 ### Pipedream API + MCP 1. Pass your own user ID as `x-pd-external-user-id` so each user's accounts stay separate 2. Send `x-pd-app-slug` to load one app's tools rather than 10,000 3. Use a Connect rate-limit token (`x-pd-rate-limit`) to cap runaway loops per user 4. Check `isError` on tool results before treating a call as done 5. Stay on `x-pd-environment: development` until billing is set, since production needs a paid plan ## Other comparisons with Make API + MCP or Pipedream API + MCP - [Activepieces API + MCP vs Make API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/activepieces-vs-make.md) - [Activepieces API + MCP vs Pipedream API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/activepieces-vs-pipedream.md) - [Make API + MCP vs n8n API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-n8n.md) - [Make API + MCP vs Paragon ActionKit + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-paragon.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 Pipedream API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-pipedream.md) - [Pipedream API + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedream-vs-tray.md) - [Pipedream API + MCP vs Windmill API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedream-vs-windmill.md) - [Pipedream API + MCP vs Workato API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedream-vs-workato.md) - [Paragon ActionKit + MCP vs Pipedream API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paragon-vs-pipedream.md)