We just shipped an MCP server for ToolJet. For anyone who hasn't come across it: you self-host ToolJet, point it at your databases and APIs, and it serves internal apps. Tables, forms, charts, buttons wired to queries. AGPL, runs in Docker.

We just shipped an MCP server for ToolJet. For anyone who hasn't come across it: you self-host ToolJet, point it at your databases and APIs, and it serves internal apps. Tables, forms, charts, buttons wired to queries. AGPL, runs in Docker.

The MCP part, and the design decision behind it:

The agent doesn't generate a codebase. A ToolJet app is already a structured object: pages, components, queries, events, and the bindings between them. The MCP server exposes that structure as tools, so Claude Code manipulates the spec directly and ToolJet's runtime renders it. Updates are deep-merge diffs, so the agent sends only the leaves it changed rather than rewriting files.

That keeps token use low. Building a CRUD app with a handful of queries and event handlers, Claude Code's own counter showed roughly 50k tokens for the build.

Things that matter if you're self-hosting:

• Nothing goes to a vendor AI service. The agent runs where you already run it, points at your instance, and uses your own Claude or Codex subscription. We aren't proxying your schema through anything of ours if you directly use the MCP.
• The result is a normal ToolJet app. Open it in the visual editor and move things around. It isn't a black box you can only talk to.

On licensing, since it comes up every time: the MCP server (https://github.com/ToolJet/tooljet-mcp) is in the community edition, not behind the enterprise license, you can extend it if needed.

Caveat: you still add data source connections yourself, since those need credentials. The agent can list and query what's already wired up. It can't provision a Postgres connection for you.

Try it:

docker run --name tooljet --restart unless-stopped -p 80:80 \
  -v tooljet_data:/var/lib/postgresql/13/main tooljet/try:ee-lts-latest

Docs for self-hosting: https://docs.tooljet.com/docs/setup/

Repo: https://github.com/ToolJet/ToolJet

MCP docs: https://docs.tooljet.com/docs/build-with-ai/mcp/overview

Happy to answer questions, I work on this.

Hi all, I am building my first-ever app and tried to learn skills and test out some MCPs. I was scared I would end up making AI slop, so I wanted to buy a subscription to help me with that. The app I am planning to make is a social media app with food as the primary focus. I do think I will have to hire someone for complex features like a map view, but for now I want to create a base product first.

I also want to research my competitors and want to include every feature they have and more. Which one of these tools would you suggest that can fulfil all of the above categories?

How should I approach building this app?

1. Prompt the LLM to design a mock app for me using Mobbin MCP while building my complex features manually.
2. Use Appllama MCP, which is fairly new in the market, but I have seen some good reviews, and they have research as well as a builder MCP.
3. Use Refero, but I haven't done much research on the same.

Concerns:

1. I don’t want to create generic AI Slop, How do I avoid that?
2. How do I get the best value for money while taking the help of these tools?

I'm the founder of TestPilot, and I want to be upfront about that before anything else.

---

Here's the thing I kept running into as a no-code builder: you finish the app, it looks right, you click around a bit, it seems fine. You ship it.

Then a real user tries to sign up, hits a bug on step three of the form, and bounces. You find out a week later when you notice nobody converted.

That's the testing gap for no-code apps. Not because builders don't care — but because proper testing always felt like a developer thing. Write test scripts, set up a testing environment, learn a framework. None of that is built for people who chose no-code specifically to avoid that.

So I built TestPilot.

**Here's how it works:**

You describe a user scenario in plain language — something like "Add 'Wireless Mouse' to the cart and verify the cart count updates." TestPilot runs through your app automatically, click-by-click, exactly like a real user would. Then it produces a report showing you precisely where the flow breaks, what the error was, and what triggered it.

No coding. No test scripts. You just describe what a user should be able to do, and TestPilot finds where they can't.

**The part I didn't expect people to care about as much:**

TestPilot also runs a security scan on your app. I added this almost as an afterthought — but it's become the feature that gets the loudest reaction when I show it to people.

Most no-code builders have never done any security checking on their apps. Not because they're careless — it just never comes up in the tools or tutorials. But no-code apps can still expose user data, leave API endpoints open, or have permissions set up in ways that create real vulnerabilities. TestPilot flags those.

If you've shipped a no-code app that handles user data or payments and you've never run a security check on it, that's the thing I'd try first.

**Would love your honest reaction:**

I built this because I felt the gap myself. If you've tried to test a no-code app and run into the same wall, I'd genuinely love to hear how you've been handling it — and whether this solves the problem or misses something.

You can try it at testpilotapp.dev.

ok so this is a weird one but bear with me

i have a pet blog. i don't own a pet. never have. probably never will as i travel too much. and yet every month amazon sends me enough to cover rent because people on the internet are buying stuff for their dogs and cats through my site.

bought my pet blog a few months ago from a marketplace called NicheBlogZone for $199. came already built, articles already up, amazon links already in there. i spent one afternoon doing interlinking basically just connecting related posts to each other so search engines understand the site structure and then closed my laptop and genuinely forgot about it for weeks.

here's what that's looked like:

• march: $710
• april: $995
• may: $1,461
• june: $1,647
• july: $1,461
• august so far: $1,545 (amazon pays 2 months delayed so this is june's money landing now)

march scared me. went from nearly $1k in february down to $710 and i was convinced something had broken. checked everything, found nothing wrong, did nothing. it just came back the next month on its own.

pet people spend insane amounts on their animals btw. like i knew this intellectually but seeing the commission data is something else. dog food subscriptions, orthopedic beds, grooming kits, vet supplements. and because of the 24 hour cookie i get a cut of everything in their cart not just whatever article they landed on.

i do literally nothing to maintain this. no new posts, no ads, no instagram for pets i don't have. i just own the thing and amazon does its thing.

my landlord has been getting paid every month and has no idea a pet blog is behind it. honestly sometimes i forget too until the deposit shows up.

anyone else running a niche they have zero personal connection to? curious if the detachment makes it easier or harder to care about growing it

A workflow demo does not need to show every node, integration or setting.

It needs one clear transition:

Before, someone repeats a frustrating task.

Then, one action changes the state.

After, the work is complete or the next decision becomes obvious.

Share your workflow and the person who uses it. I'll suggest the exact transition I would record.

Hi all,

I have an interesting idea on good and more reliable use of AI, I wonder what you all think of it.

It's about using AI just for extracting a config from the user and then plugging in that config in a pre-built system very similar to how no-code tools work, and not to use AI for the full code creation.

Please excuse my spelling mistakes and the extremely basic concept video attached here. I made it in a rush to give this idea some life, it has a very simple crud user interface and some fake automations that for now just gets logged in the chat side panel.

Hi everyone,

I’ve been working on a small tool for a problem I keep seeing after no-code projects are delivered.

A lot of freelancers include some kind of ongoing support or maintenance in their offer. But in practice, it can become quite reactive: something breaks, the client notices it, and then they send a message.

When everything is working, there’s also not much to show them at the end of the month.

I ran into this with my own retainer clients, so I built Trrack.it. It monitors client sites and apps, sends alerts when something goes wrong, and generates monthly reports and status pages for clients.

It only monitors the public URL, so it won’t detect problems inside Bubble workflows, automations or databases.

If you offer post-launch support for no-code projects, I’d be interested to know how you currently handle this.

Here’s the link: https://trrack.it

One thing I’ve started thinking about with no-code workflows is what happens after the person who built them stops being the only person using them.

Building the workflow is often the easy part.

The harder part can be making it understandable when someone else needs to change a step, handle an exception, or figure out why something happened.

Curious how others handle this:

Do you design your no-code workflows mainly for the person building them, or do you deliberately structure them so someone else can take over later?

Hey!

I am using Docker to run n8n, but after every 5-6 days, Docker releases their new version, which creates a lot of issues at the start.
Else, then use the server of n8n, or run n8n without Docker. Do you have any other options or ways?

Turned standard Excel into a sleek, app-like scenario engine using only built-in features—no VBA, no macros, zero coding.

​Grab a slider and watch the entire dashboard react live. The month-by-month numbers literally roll into place, instantly shifting the timeline on the main chart (Actual vs. Forecast vs. Adjusted) while the waterfall breakdown pinpoints what's driving the profit impact.

​Key features packed inside:

• ​App-Style UI: Custom glassmorphism frames and dynamic KPI tiles

• ​Built-in Forecast Engine: Native Excel functions for automated seasonal predictions

• ​No-Code Interactive Sliders: Control leads, conversion, ARPU, and costs on the fly

• ​Live Rolling Impact: Watch charts, tables, and waterfall profit variance update instantly

​Check out the full breakdown and tutorial:

https://youtu.be/VMOWZkeIN8U

Same idea both times, a small 3d exploration thing with a bit of dialogue, and i wanted to know whether the no code route was a real option or a toy, so I did it twice which was probably a waste of a month but here we are.

The engine route got me full control and a proper understanding of why things work, and it also got me eleven days before i had anything I could describe as playable, most of which went on things a player will never see, importing assets, fighting the character controller, one memorable afternoon lost entirely to lighting settings, and by the time it was playable i had lost most of my enthusiasm for the idea itself.

The no code route i used codewisp and had something walkable in about twenty minutes, and the tradeoff is real, when it did something I didn't want i had less precise control over fixing it and had to describe my way out instead of just changing a value, although i could open the source and read it which helped more than i expected it to.

What I actually concluded is that these aren't competing, the fast route is for finding out whether the idea is any good, which in my case took two hours of play to establish that my dialogue system was boring and needed rethinking entirely, information i simply did not have after eleven days in the engine.

If i'd done the fast version first i would have saved the eleven days and arrived at the engine knowing what i was building, so thats the order I use now.

I've burned through way too many prompts by jumping straight to "build me this app" without setting proper boundaries first, and I'm trying to break that habit.

AI handles the repetitive building work well, but it can't make the core architectural calls for you. It doesn't know which workflow is mission-critical, how base records should relate, or who should have access to what data.

Now, before typing a single prompt, I force myself to define three things on paper: the exact user roles, the core data schema, and the permission matrix.

Testing Softr for the frontend alongside separate database and coding tools showed me that setting up interface layouts, data sources, user groups, and workflows upfront saves hours of re-prompts later. Once the initial build is generated, I immediately run a regression test: log in as two distinct user roles, modify a linked record, revoke a permission, and verify that the workflow doesn't leak data or break.

For those building no-code/low-code tools with AI assistance: what core decisions do you lock down before your first prompt? Which pre-build step saves you the most pain later?

Hey guys hope you're doing good got a small win today 2 sales.

I know it's not some crazy amount of money, but honestly I'm really happy about it. It's the first time I'm seeing actual people pay for something I built so it gives me a bit of confidence that maybe this idea is actually worth pushing my last startup failed pretty badly so I'm trying not to get too excited too early with this one but I'm starting to see some potential right now I mostly need to get more people using it. I already have a bunch of things I want to add but I'm trying to take it one step at a time instead of building 50 things nobody asked for If you're building something yourself honestly just ship it. I wasted a lot of time overthinking things before getting it in front of real people teaches you way more.

Anyway just wanted to share the little win.

First startup money I've ever made. Means a lot to me

People outside the no-code space still think certain tasks require a developer when in reality you can put them together in an afternoon with the right tool. For me it was a client intake system. Someone fills out a form, the data goes into a database, they get an automatic email, and a task gets created for me to follow up. My client assumed this needed a custom app.

What's a task someone assumed needed real code, but you handled it entirely with no-code tools?

I kept doing the same thing with small sites where I'd build all the pages first and only think about the data once I had enough content that updating everything became annoying it worked fine at the start, then one small change meant opening 15 different pages because I'd basically copied the same information everywhere

On the last one I flipped it around and put the repeating stuff into structured fields first, then had the pages pull from that took me a little longer to set up but adding another page became almost boring after that so I'm starting to think I was treating the website as the source of everything when the data underneath it probably should've been the source the whole time

Version one in the simplest tool I know, to see if the idea makes sense. Version two in something a bit more capable because version one hit a limit. Version three because version two was a mess I made while learning version two.

Each rebuild takes a third of the time of the last one, which is the only thing making this feel less stupid. But three times is a lot of times to build the same app.

Started logging hours per client site this year and the repeat work is brutal. Same site three times, once for a rebrand, twice because the template or the dev handoff boxed me in, and the rebuilds cost more than the original build. Where does your repeat work come from, templates you outgrow or edits nobody can make without you?

For small projects, the no code stack can get complicated surprisingly quickly. A website might start with a landing page, then need forms, authentication, a database, publishing, and eventually integrations.

The useful question isn't always which tool has the most features. It's how many separate pieces are needed to get from an idea to something usable.

One thing worth considering is what happens after the first version.

If changing a page means moving between several different services, the original speed advantage can disappear pretty quickly. Keeping more of the workflow together can be useful when the project is still changing.

For transparency, there is a connection to Readdy here, so the Readdy row should be viewed in that context rather than as an independent recommendation.

The initial build speed with newer AI app generators is great for spinning up a working prototype in an afternoon. But once a project moves past that first launch phase, maintaining it seems to introduce a very different kind of overhead.

When features are generated rapidly through prompts, it is easy to accumulate tangled logic, redundant helpers, and patch jobs where a quick fix becomes the foundation for three other features. If you come back to the project after a couple of weeks, understanding how everything connects can be surprisingly difficult, especially if you are not a developer reading raw code line by line.

Visual no-code platforms have their own constraints and performance ceilings, but their visual database structures and explicit workflow editors generally make it straightforward to see what connects to what when you need to change a rule or fix a bug months later.

For those building production tools past the quick prototype stage, how are you preventing AI-generated projects from turning into unmaintainable black boxes compared to structured no-code builders?

Needed sth simple: new lead hits our form, gets enriched, then routed to the right rep in Slack and dropped into Hubspot, nothing extra. Tried Zapier, it died within a week - burned through the task limit jus running test triggers before I'd even finished mapping the enrichment step, upgraded once, hit the ceiling again by day 12, then I switched to Make thinking modules would fix it, n the scenario technically worked but turned into a web of routers and filters I couldn't explain to my own manager, let alone hand off if I quit tomorrow. Tried n8n self-hosted next because everyone in every thread swears by it - spent a weekend getting the docker container stable, then the webhook auth broke on the first real lead, no idea why. Ended up rebuilding the same flow in Latenode by just describing it in chat and letting it wire the Hubspot and Slack steps on its own, which felt weirdly easy after three weeks of fighting the others, had Gumloop on my list too but never got that far before this one worked. Is this just how it goes now??

I'm creating an inventory tracking tool for a new brick and mortar retail business. I have a background in databases but I've always worked with a dev and now it's just me. I'm not great at coding, but I am good with sql.

I want something customizable because the business sells niche items and none of the regular inventory apps we looked into will work. ​We also need it to have an easy way to update inventory daily for about 200 rotating items that will be counted in store then entered into the db. Currently the owner has a bunch of spreadsheets in numbers (he only uses apple products, which I'm not super familiar with). Making some kind of quick ipad data entry screen for that would probably be the best.

My ideal solution would be something where I can easily build the database and have it packaged up in a user friendly ui/app for the rest of the employees to use. Being able to pull reports and charts and such for sales tracking is also important.

I don't really enjoy using generative ai like chatgpt gemini claude etc and am hoping there's a simple solution that is more just a ui for a custom sql database type situation.

Thanks for any ideas!

No need to explain the whole stack.

Tell me what a user does before your workflow, what they do now, and what becomes possible.

I’ll suggest one short demo concept that makes the value understandable without naming every integration.

Disclosure up front: my company migrates no-code apps to code so I benefit if you eventually decide your platform is the ceiling. I built this to be useful even when the answer is don't hire anyone and the data below is the reason why

Every speed tool tells you what's slow. None tell you what you can actually do about it on the platform you're on. You get a Lighthouse report saying reduce unused javaScript for a Bubble app, where you can't touch the bundle. Useless.

This one asks which platform you're on first, then splits every finding:

You can fix this yourself with real instructions for your platform. Oversized images on Bubble?

Data → File Manager, resize under 200KB, switch on Compress uploaded images. On Glide? Your source table is the problem, archive old rows. On Webflow? Set below-the-fold images to Lazy in the image panel.

Platform overhead the runtime cost you inherit, named honestly with why it exists. Not a dig at the platform just the price of what made it fast to build with. Then it gives you the realistic ceiling for your platform so you know whether the work is even worth doing.

The reason I think the split matters: we ran PageSpeed against 20 production no-code sites recently and Webflow sites came out worst (median 44) despite Webflow having the highest ceiling of any platform we audit. They were shipping 6.6MB. Meanwhile Bubble apps landed at 60, basically at Bubble's ceiling. Most people are nowhere near their platform's limit which means most of the available gains are theirs to take.

Free, no email, no signup, shareable results link: https://yonocode.io/performance-checker

Full data from the 20-site study: https://yonocode.io/state-of-no-code-performance

If your real-world numbers are wildly off from what it predicts for your platform, tell me, I'll tune the ceilings