# Make API + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP > Make API + MCP has a score of 58.9 (C) against Tray.ai API + MCP's 55.6 (C). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is agent ergonomics, 30 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side. - Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-tray - Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-tray.md (~1,450 tokens) - Slim: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-tray.min.md (~330 tokens, same facts, less prose, for token-sensitive contexts) - JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-tray.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 Tray.ai API + MCP's 55.6 (C). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is agent ergonomics, 30 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 - Tray.ai API + MCP: grade C, 55.6/100, rank #312 of 452. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/tray.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/tray.json ## Which one, for what Pick Make API + MCP for agent ergonomics (+30), payments & pricing (+30), transparency & trust (+6). Pick Tray.ai API + MCP for reliability (+9), schema & documentation (+14), maintenance & community (+24). ## Score by category | Category | Weight | Make API + MCP | Tray.ai API + MCP | Edge | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 63 | 72 | Tray.ai API + MCP +9 | | Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 66 | 80 | Tray.ai API + MCP +14 | | Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 63 | 33 | Make API + MCP +30 | | Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 68 | 66 | Make API + MCP +2 | | Payments & pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 30 | 0 | Make API + MCP +30 | | Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Maintenance & community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 36 | 60 | Tray.ai API + MCP +24 | | Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 75 | 69 | Make API + MCP +6 | | Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | | | **Total** | | **58.9 · C** | **55.6 · C** | | ## Facts side by side | Fact | Make API + MCP | Tray.ai API + MCP | | --- | --- | --- | | Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API | | Vendor | Make (Celonis) | Tray.ai | | Hosted endpoint | `https://eu1.make.com/api/v2` | `https://api.tray.io/core/v1` | | Transports | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | | Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth or key | | Pricing | Freemium | Paid | | x402 | no | no | | Licence | proprietary | proprietary | | 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 | 2026-09-09 | | Popularity | none | none | | 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. **Tray.ai API + MCP.** Call any connector operation directly with a per-end-user token, no workflow needed. No published prices and no self-serve plan. ## 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 ### Tray.ai API + MCP 1. Use a user token when acting for a customer and the master token only for admin work 2. Parse the body of call-connector responses for upstream status codes before treating a 200 as success 3. Point Headless MCP at the workspace's region, api.eu1.tray.io or api.ap1.tray.io outside the US 4. Pick the workspace at OAuth sign-in. Headless MCP binds it to the session and takes no workspace ID 5. Ask before any Headless MCP delete. The server won't ## Other comparisons with Make API + MCP or Tray.ai API + MCP - [Activepieces API + MCP vs Make API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/activepieces-vs-make.md) - [Activepieces API + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/activepieces-vs-tray.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 Pipedream API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/make-vs-pipedream.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 Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/n8n-vs-tray.md) - [Pipedream API + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedream-vs-tray.md) - [Tray.ai API + MCP vs Windmill API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/tray-vs-windmill.md) - [Tray.ai API + MCP vs Workato API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/tray-vs-workato.md) - [Paragon ActionKit + MCP vs Tray.ai API + MCP](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paragon-vs-tray.md)