Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Performance Review vs Scream Void
In-depth architectural comparison of the Performance Review and Scream Void 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Performance Review
Social Media · Local stdio
Quality: 25/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Scream Void
Social Media · Local stdio
Quality: 25/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Performance Review if you need specialized Social Media tools running via a local process. Choose Scream Void if your workspace requires Social Media integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
P
Choose Performance Review when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Social Media domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
S
Choose Scream Void when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Social Media domain.
- You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Performance Review Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Scream Void Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
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).
Performance Review Configuration
Scream Void Configuration