Uluesky vs Twitter X Automation

In-depth architectural comparison of the Uluesky and Twitter X Automation 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 Uluesky 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 Uluesky Details

Choose Twitter X Automation 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 Twitter X Automation Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Uluesky Social Media	Twitter X Automation Social Media
Summary	MCP server for Bluesky social network — search posts, get profiles, and browse feeds	Twitter X automation MCP - post schedule analytics engagement social media
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": {
    "uluesky": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "uluesky"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "twitter-x-automation": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "xactions"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons