EZTexting MCP vs Pigeonpost

In-depth architectural comparison of the EZTexting MCP and Pigeonpost MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose EZTexting MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore EZTexting MCP Details

Choose Pigeonpost when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Communication domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Pigeonpost Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	EZTexting MCP Communication	Pigeonpost Communication
Summary	Official EZTexting MCP server: SMS/MMS messaging, contacts, workflows, reports.	Private asynchronous Pigeonpost messaging for AI agents over local MCP stdio.
Category & Scope	Communication	Communication
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "eztexting-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@eztexting/mcp-server"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "pigeonpost": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "pigeonpost"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons