PitchGhost vs Twitterapi Docs MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the PitchGhost and Twitterapi Docs MCP 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 PitchGhost when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Social Media domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: whoami, search_ghosts, get_ghost.

Explore PitchGhost Details

Choose Twitterapi Docs MCP 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: search_twitterapi_docs, get_twitterapi_endpoint, list_twitterapi_endpoints.

Explore Twitterapi Docs MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	PitchGhost Social Media	Twitterapi Docs MCP dorukardahan Social Media
Summary	AI-powered social listening across Twitter, LinkedIn, Reddit, Facebook, and more.	Offline access to TwitterAPI.io documentation for AI assistants. 52 API endpoints, guides, pricing info, and authentication docs.
Category & Scope	Social Media

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": {
    "pitchghost": {
      "url": "https://mcp.pitchghost.com/"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "dorukardahan-twitterapi-docs-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "twitterapi-io-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons