How to Get Your SaaS Listed in Meta Muse

To get your SaaS listed in Meta Muse, submit a connector through Meta’s Muse Connector Platform and prepare it for functional, security, legal, and end-to-end review. ^[1]

• A plausible connector completes a useful task in Muse rather than simply wrapping public pages or listing links. ^[1]
• Prepare connection details, authentication, requested scopes, credentials, and a dedicated reviewer test account. ^[1]
• Meta allows connectors with read access to financial data but is not currently approving new financial money-movement tools. ^[1]

What does it mean to get a SaaS listed in Meta Muse?

A Muse directory connector is a developer-submitted integration that users can find in Muse after Meta approves it.

For a small SaaS company, a listing is an approved product integration—not simply a link to the service or a connection one user configured for themselves. Meta says users can find approved connectors in Muse, subject to its review process.

Is a listed connector the same as a custom connector?

A custom connector is a connection Muse guides a user through creating for a service that is not yet in the Connector list; the process may involve retrieving API information from that service. ^[2] Meta says it does not review custom connectors or how they use information. ^[2]

• Directory submission: A SaaS developer submits a connector for review through the platform. Meta says users can find approved connectors in Muse.
• Custom connector: A Muse user asks Muse to create a connection to a service not in the list. Meta warns that it does not review that connection or its information use. ^[2]

If your goal is an official directory listing, use the developer submission process; a user-created connection is not evidence of Meta approval. Users can disconnect a connector in Settings, which stops further data exchange, but information already used may remain in Muse memories or conversation history. ^[2]

What makes a SaaS connector eligible for review?

A strong submission should make a useful task easier or more reliable in Muse than it would be in a browser alone. Meta says connectors should improve the browser experience through better information, account access, more reliable actions, or fewer steps. ^[1] A thin wrapper around public pages or a list of links is not enough, and the connector should let Muse finish the tasks it starts within its approved tool scope. ^[1]

Use this practical checklist to decide whether your idea is worth developing. These are product-fit questions, not a substitute for Meta’s formal review criteria or a prediction of approval:

• Is there a specific user goal? Name the task and the person who needs it, rather than describing the connector only as access to your API.
• Does the connector do meaningful work? Identify actions or information that make the task easier, more reliable, or more complete in Muse.
• Can Muse finish the task? Map the workflow from the user’s request through the connector’s actions to a clear completion point.
• Are the permissions proportionate? Check that requested access matches the tools and actions the workflow needs.
• Can you provide a working review path? Confirm that you can supply connection information and a dedicated test account for the submitted tools. ^[1]

Illustrative example, not a Meta rule: A weak concept is “connect my SaaS so Muse can open our dashboard.” It leaves the user to find information and complete the actual task. A stronger concept is “let a user ask Muse to find an overdue project item, assign it to a teammate, and confirm the update.” The second describes an end-to-end task and the connector actions needed to complete it. This distinction may help you judge product value, but it does not predict Meta’s decision.

Financial products have a specific boundary: Meta says it allows connectors with read access to financial data but is not currently approving new financial money-movement tools. ^[1] Do not assume that a particular protocol or technical implementation makes a product eligible; the documented criteria focus on usefulness, scope, review, and the connector’s tools. ^[1]

How should you submit a review-ready connector?

The available guidance does not specify the exact account type, sign-in method, or portal button names, so follow the current instructions shown when you access the platform. The requirements below distinguish Meta’s stated submission details from practical preparation advice.

1. Enter the platform and begin an application. As a prerequisite, make sure you can access the platform and involve someone on your team who can provide the connector’s technical details. Meta’s cited materials do not state a separate account prerequisite.
2. Prepare the connection information. Meta asks for the endpoint, authentication setup, requested scopes, and credentials needed to connect to your service. OAuth client credentials and an API key are examples of credentials it gives. ^[1] Gather these details before completing the submission so you can describe how reviewers will connect.
3. Provide reviewer access. Meta asks for a dedicated test account that lets reviewers connect your service and exercise each submitted tool. ^[1] Practical preparation: test the account and credentials yourself, and ensure the account has the access needed for the workflow without exposing unrelated customer data.
4. Describe each tool and its behavior. Explain what each tool does and whether it reads or writes data. Meta says Read or Write classifications and Sensitive-write annotations are coming to the portal; for now, it asks developers to include annotations in tool documentation. ^[1]
5. Check the workflow and limits. Map the user’s goal, the connector’s actions, and where the task is complete. As preparation, document what happens when an action fails, information is missing, or the workflow cannot be completed. This helps reviewers understand the connector’s limits; it is practical advice, not a separately stated formal requirement.
6. Submit through the platform and monitor for follow-up. If Meta requests changes, use the feedback to revise the connector or submission materials and follow the platform’s instructions for providing the update. Meta’s terms allow it to require changes, but the cited materials do not specify a particular resubmission workflow. ^[3]

Make the approval point visible in the product design wherever a user action requires confirmation. Clear boundaries also help reviewers understand which actions are read-only and which change data.

What data and privacy details should you prepare?

Explain what access your connector needs. Meta’s submission guidance asks for authentication setup, requested scopes, and the credentials needed to connect to the service. ^[1] Keep the explanation specific enough that a reviewer or customer can understand what the connector can access and do.

Do not treat directory review and custom-connector use as equivalent assurances. Meta’s Help Center says it does not review custom connectors or how they use information, and advises users to grant access with caution and review the provider’s privacy policies. ^[2] That warning concerns custom connectors; it does not establish that directory review certifies a SaaS provider’s overall privacy or security.

As a practical step, make your privacy and data-handling information easy for customers to find, and ensure it matches the connector’s actual scopes and behavior. Explain data access, writes, and relevant limitations in plain language. This sets expectations without implying that Meta has independently certified your broader data practices.

What happens after you submit a Muse connector?

Its connector terms cover connectors, actions, plug-ins, MCP servers, and other integrations, and allow Meta to review, test, approve, reject, or require changes to a submitted connector at its discretion. ^[3] The terms establish that MCP servers are in scope, not that using MCP guarantees acceptance.

Before submitting, use this short final checklist to confirm you completed the detailed preparation above:

• Workflow: Check your workflow map and confirm Muse can complete the intended task.
• Reviewer access: Verify the endpoint, credentials, and dedicated test account.
• Permissions: Compare requested scopes with your tool descriptions and read, write, or sensitive-write annotations.

For your business plan, treat an approved listing as a possible discovery channel, not as a forecast of demand. Pursue it when the connector supports a compelling workflow and you have a credible way to reach relevant customers.

Frequently asked questions

How long does Meta’s Muse connector review take?

The sources do not state a review duration. Do not plan around an assumed turnaround time.

Does Meta charge a fee to submit a Muse connector?

The cited submission and terms pages do not specify a connector submission fee. Check the current platform instructions before budgeting; the available material does not establish whether a fee applies.

Can an MCP server be submitted as a Muse connector?

Meta’s connector terms explicitly include MCP servers within the integrations they cover. ^[3] That establishes that MCP servers are in scope of the terms, not that a particular server will be approved or that MCP is the only accepted route.

Can a connector developer request featured placement?

Meta says editors review connectors for featured placement, but the cited platform page does not describe a separate request process.

Sources

• ^[3] Meta connector terms covering connectors, actions, plug-ins, MCP servers, and other integrations.