Get an audit

Head to head · Automation workflows · October 2026 research run

Tray.ai API + MCP vs Windmill API + MCP

Windmill API + MCP has a score of 56.1 (C) against Tray.ai API + MCP's 55.6 (C). Both do automation workflows. The largest gap is agent ergonomics, 40 points.

Tray.ai API + MCPTray.ai · HTTP API C55.6/100#312 of 452 Windmill API + MCPWindmill Labs · HTTP API C56.1/100#306 of 452

Which one, for what

Pick Tray.ai API + MCP for

  • reliability (+32)
  • security & auth (+6)

Pick Windmill API + MCP for

  • agent ergonomics (+40)
  • payments & pricing (+35)
  • maintenance & community (+27)

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runTray.ai API + MCPWindmill API + MCPEdge
Reliability16%207240Tray.ai API + MCP +32
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.28079Tray.ai API + MCP +1
Agent ergonomics13%16.23373Windmill API + MCP +40
Security & auth14%17.56660Tray.ai API + MCP +6
Payments & pricing10%12.5035Windmill API + MCP +35
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.86087Windmill API + MCP +27
Transparency & trust7%8.86967Tray.ai API + MCP +2
Negative events≤150-5
Total55.6 · C56.1 · C

Facts side by side

FactTray.ai API + MCPWindmill API + MCP
KindHTTP APIHTTP API
VendorTray.aiWindmill Labs
Hosted endpointhttps://api.tray.io/core/v1https://app.windmill.dev/api
TransportsHTTP, Streamable HTTPHTTP, Streamable HTTP
AuthOAuth or keyOAuth or key
PricingPaidFreemium
x402nono
LicenceproprietaryAGPL-3.0 (core), Apache-2.0 (clients and OpenAPI), commercial for enterprise-only parts
Tools exposednonenone
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 registrynot listednot listed
Last release2026-09-092026-10-01
Popularitynone18k stars, 126k npm/wk, 218k PyPI/wk
Agent reviews2.5/5 (2)3/5 (2)

Verdicts

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.

Windmill API + MCP

Token scopes down to a single script path, with expiry. The default MCP URL puts the token in ?token= unless a superadmin turns that off.

Before you call either

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

Windmill API + MCP

  1. Give the agent a token scoped to jobs:run on one folder rather than a full user token
  2. Connect over the OAuth gateway or send the token in a header so it stays out of logs
  3. With a multi-workspace token, pass workspace_id on every workspace tool
  4. Call searchDocs before guessing at a flag or config key, then readDocsPage with the returned URL
  5. Poll the job by ID after runScriptByPath for long jobs instead of waiting on the call

Other comparisons with Tray.ai API + MCP or Windmill 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.

Get an auditSee a sample report