Methodology · Updated October 10, 2026
How we choose
Our promise is to help you find the right MCP for the marketing job you need to do. That only works if you can see where every claim comes from and how old it is.
Disclosure: the publisher of this site has commercial relationships with some of the companies whose products we rank. Read our full disclosure.
What gets listed
A product is listed when we can identify an actual MCP server for it, name its exact publisher or maintainer, and source its capabilities from primary documentation. An ordinary API, integration or browser extension is not an MCP. Where a vendor has several MCP products or an older implementation, we name the one we reviewed and note the others.
We currently list 13 servers. We would rather publish fewer complete listings than many thin ones. Categories appear only when at least two reviewed tools do the job.
The criteria
We describe these in words. We don’t publish numerical scores, because a number would imply measurement we haven’t done.
- Usefulness for the marketing task
- We judge each tool against a specific job: researching keywords, reporting on ads, publishing a page. Our shortlist is an opinionated ranking of the tools we’d point you to first, and every pick on it still names the job it is for.
- Available actions and access controls
- We separate reading from changing. For anything that writes, we record what it can change and what controls the vendor provides: read-only modes, approval steps, permission scopes or admin rules.
- Setup requirements
- Hosted or local, which plan or role is needed, which credentials, and which assistants the vendor documents. Setup often decides whether a tool is usable at all.
- Pricing and cost model
- Whether the MCP has its own fee, depends on a plan, spends API units, charges per request, or has paid steps. We link the pricing source and avoid typing prices that change often.
- Maintainer and maturity
- We identify the exact server and who maintains it. Vendor-maintained and community projects are labeled differently. Experimental, beta and archived states are stated plainly.
- Documentation quality
- Clear, current documentation is a feature: it is how you know what a tool will do with your account. Where documentation is silent, we say so instead of guessing.
Evidence labels
Documentation reviewed
We read the vendor’s current documentation, repository or announcement and the facts on the page come from those sources. It establishes what the vendor says the tool does. It does not establish reliability, speed, output quality or that installation succeeds.
Documentation reviewed, endpoint checked
As above, and we confirmed the published server address answers as an MCP server, for example by listing its tools. It still says nothing about how well a full workflow performs.
Hands-on tested
Reserved for a workflow we actually ran, with the date, assistant, account type and result written on the profile. No listing carries this label yet.
When sources conflict, or a detail can’t be established, we mark it “Unconfirmed” or leave it out. For example, we list Ahrefs’ ability to change data as unconfirmed because its documentation names management tools without saying which ones write.
Commercial relationships
The publisher of this site has commercial relationships with some of the companies whose products we rank. Every tool, whoever makes it, is described against the criteria above, and every profile lists its limitations and when another tool is the better fit. Our rankings are our opinion; please weigh them with that relationship in mind. Read our full disclosure.
How content is maintained
Every listing stores its sources, evidence label and the date its facts were last checked. The date changes only when we actually re-check the sources, not when we edit wording. Pricing and plan requirements are the most volatile facts; we link to the vendor’s own page so you can confirm before you buy.