Performance Review vs The Committee

In-depth architectural comparison of the Performance Review and The Committee 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 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).

Explore Performance Review Details

T

Choose The Committee 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).
• Primary tools included: the_committee_convene.

Explore The Committee Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Performance Review Social Media	T The Committee Social Media
Summary	performance-review MCP — wraps StupidAPIs (requires X-API-Key)	the-committee MCP — wraps StupidAPIs (requires X-API-Key)
Category & Scope	Social Media	Social Media
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": {
    "performance-review": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "performance-review"
      ]
    }
  }
}

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

Related MCP Server Comparisons