# Pipedrive API + MCP vs Relaticle (slim)

> Pipedrive scores 61.5 (C) to Relaticle's 59.6 (C) for crm records. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedrive-vs-relaticle.md (~3,800 tokens) · this version ~1,680 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedrive-vs-relaticle.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/pipedrive-vs-relaticle
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-07
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Pipedrive API + MCP scores 61.5 (C) on agent readiness against Relaticle's 59.6 (C), and leads in 3 of 7 scored categories. Relaticle leads on schema & documentation and maintenance & community. Both do crm records.

- Pipedrive API + MCP: C 61.5, rank #606 of 1486 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/pipedrive.min.md
- Relaticle: C 59.6, rank #694 of 1486 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/relaticle.min.md
- Pipedrive API + MCP, good for Small and mid-size sales teams running deal pipelines who want an agent to update deals and log activities. Ahead on Reliability, 58 against 40.
- Relaticle, good for Small teams who want an open-source CRM they can self-host and let an agent write to. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 86 against 80; Maintenance & community, 90 against 83. Also Open source.

| Category | Pipedrive API + MCP | Relaticle |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 58 | 40 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 80 | 86 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 61 | 59 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 53 | 57 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 30 | 30 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 83 | 90 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 76 | 73 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Pipedrive API + MCP | Relaticle |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Pipedrive | Relaticle, Inc. |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://api.pipedrive.com/api/v2` | `https://mcp.relaticle.com` |
| Transports | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | Streamable HTTP |
| Pricing | Paid | Freemium |
| Licence | none | AGPL-3.0 |
| Tools exposed | none | 50 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | yes |
| MCP registry | not listed | `com.relaticle/crm` |
| Last release | 2026-10-21 | 2026-11-05 |
| Terms last updated | 2026-09-16 | 2026-08-26 |
| Privacy policy last updated | 2026-07-02 | 2026-11-04 |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | yes | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice | yes | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | yes | not found in the text |
| Popularity | 234 stars, 72k npm/wk | 1.8k stars |
| Agent reviews | 2.5/5 (2) | none |

Why the edge:
- Reliability, Pipedrive API + MCP +18: Pipedrive API + MCP 58 (Status page at status.pipedrive.com (run on Sorry), linked from Pipedrive's developer pages, with components including REST API v1 but nothing for API v2 or the MCP server, per the 1 October check (20). On 4 November its robots.txt answered an empty 406, which this run reads as a refusal, so the 1 October incident readings from it are struck and no part of the window from 6 August could be read (5). Rate limits documented in detail, a daily token budget per company plus burst limits per 2 seconds by plan and auth type (15). Responses carry `x-ratelimit-*` and `x-daily-requests-left` headers and a 429 when the budget runs out. The rate-limit page gives no Retry-After or safe-retry guidance for writes, though the Node client's 36.1.0 notes (21 October) mention `Retry-After` on a 429 (8 of 15). No SLA found (0). REST is GA, and the MCP setup article for Claude, updated on 22 October 2026, no longer labels the server beta (10).); Relaticle 40 (Graded with the hosted lines on Relaticle Cloud's REST API and MCP server, the surface an outside agent calls; the software also self-hosts. No status page is linked and status.relaticle.com did not connect (0). With no readable history the incident line scores 5. Limits have numbers: 600 a minute per workspace and 300 reads or 60 writes a minute per token in the source, and 120 MCP calls a minute per user in the docs (15). 429 is in the OpenAPI responses and upserts by unique field give a safe retry for creates, but the backoff guidance sits on a docs section we read only as a heading (10 of 15). No SLA (0). Version 3.8, not labelled beta (10). 0 + 5 + 15 + 10 + 0 + 10 = 40.)
- Maintenance & community, Relaticle +7: Pipedrive API + MCP 83 (Node client v36.1.0 on 21 October 2026 (30). Node releases on 6 August, 13 August, twice on 8 September, and 13 more from 9 to 21 October, counted half as SDK tags (20). Public changelog with dated entries, the newest announced on 29 July and effective 1 August 2026. We didn't test support (10 of 15). Not in the official MCP registry (only third-party Pipedrive servers), but official SDKs are current (15). The Node client publishes from CI, and a workflow auto-closes stale issues (8 of 10).); Relaticle 90 (v3.8.2 tagged on 5 November 2026 and commits on 6 November (30). Thirteen tags between 9 October and 5 November alone (20). More than 2,500 commits since 1 August and merged pull requests numbered past 1,100; the GitHub API did not answer, so open issues and reply times were not counted (15 of 25). Verified com.relaticle/crm namespace in the official MCP registry with the hosted remote (15). CI, tests, security-audit and Dependabot workflows, PHP 8.5 and Laravel 13 (10). 30 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 = 90.)
- Schema & documentation, Relaticle +6: Pipedrive API + MCP 80 (OpenAPI 3.0.1 file for v2, re-read on 4 November with 158 operations and the token in the `x-api-token` header (25). llms.txt on the readme.io docs (10). Pipedrive's MCP tools article (updated 22 October 2026) lists 51 tools by resource, each with its action and some with a use case; the server's own tool definitions weren't read. API reference descriptions are adequate (10 of 20). Typed parameters in the OpenAPI (12 of 15). Examples on every reference page. We didn't read an error reference (10 of 15). v1 and v2 paths and a dated changelog that flags breaking changes and deprecations (13 of 15).); Relaticle 86 (OpenAPI 3.1 at /openapi.json and /openapi.yaml with 34 operations (25). llms.txt with a when-to-use and when-not section, and developer pages (10). The llms.txt and MCP docs say what the API is for and what it doesn't do (no email over REST, no meetings), while only 5 of 34 operations carry a description (14 of 20). 114 required lists and typed MCP inputs, but few enums (11 of 15). 661 examples and responses for 401, 402, 403, 404, 409, 422 and 429 (14 of 15). /v1 and frequent tagged releases, with no changelog page (relaticle.com/changelog is 404) (12 of 15). 25 + 10 + 14 + 11 + 14 + 12 = 86.)