agent-twitter-client-mcp

Provides an MCP (Model Context Protocol) server that exposes Twitter/X actions (read tweets, search, post/like/retweet/quote, follow/profile data) to AI agents, including optional Grok chat/realtime features via the underlying agent-twitter-client integration.

Evaluated Mar 30, 2026 (21d ago)
Homepage ↗ Repo ↗ Communication mcp twitter x agent integration social-media grok typescript nodejs
⚙ Agent Friendliness
68
/ 100
Can an agent use this?
🔒 Security
52
/ 100
Is it safe for agents?
⚡ Reliability
41
/ 100
Does it work consistently?

Score Breakdown

⚙ Agent Friendliness

MCP Quality
75
Documentation
75
Error Messages
--
Auth Simplicity
40
Rate Limits
75

🔒 Security

TLS Enforcement
90
Auth Strength
45
Scope Granularity
20
Dep. Hygiene
60
Secret Handling
50

Strengths: supports environment-based credential configuration and uses an MCP server model (credentials not embedded in code per README). Concerns: cookie-based authentication to Twitter is high-risk (long-lived secrets; potential logging exposure if not carefully handled). Scope/granularity and least-privilege are not described; mutation tools (post/like/follow) increase impact if misused by an agent. TLS enforcement for the MCP transport is not explicitly documented in the provided content, but typical MCP servers use HTTPS/WebSockets when deployed; score reflects assumption. No dependency vulnerability/SBOM/CVE scanning info is provided.

⚡ Reliability

Uptime/SLA
20
Version Stability
55
Breaking Changes
35
Error Recovery
55
AF Security Reliability

Best When

You want agent-to-Twitter functionality via MCP tools (e.g., Claude Desktop) and can supply the necessary Twitter credentials/cookies, accepting that Twitter/Grok behavior may vary and requires ongoing maintenance.

Avoid When

You need strict OAuth scopes-based least privilege, domain-verified enterprise security controls, or you cannot securely manage Twitter credentials/cookies in an environment where agents may access them.

Use Cases

  • Let an LLM/agent fetch tweets or user profile data and summarize or reason over it
  • Enable an agent workflow to search Twitter/X for topics and then take actions (e.g., post, like, follow)
  • Provide an MCP tool surface for Claude/Desktop (or other MCP hosts) to interact with Twitter without direct API access
  • Demo/experimental Grok-on-Twitter style interactions through the same MCP interface

Not For

  • Production-grade, high-assurance deployments without review of auth and data-handling (uses cookie-based auth to Twitter)
  • Avoiding platform policy risk (posting/liking/following are high-impact actions)
  • Use as a general-purpose Twitter API replacement with stable guarantees (Twitter changes frequently; Grok has extra constraints)

Interface

REST API
No
GraphQL
No
gRPC
No
MCP Server
Yes
SDK
No
Webhooks
No

Authentication

Methods: cookie-based authentication username/password authentication Twitter API v2 credentials (API key/secret and access tokens)
OAuth: No Scopes: No

Auth is configured via environment variables (AUTH_METHOD with cookies/credentials/api). Cookie auth is recommended and requires auth_token/ct0/twid values; Grok access additionally depends on agent-twitter-client version and (per README) Premium requirements.

Pricing

Free tier: No
Requires CC: No

No pricing information for the MCP server itself is provided; costs/limits are likely dominated by Twitter/X and Grok/Twitter Premium constraints (as described for Grok rate limits).

Agent Metadata

Pagination
none
Idempotent
False
Retry Guidance
Documented

Known Gotchas

  • Cookie authentication requires cookies in a specific JSON array format with proper domains; expired cookies will break auth.
  • Twitter/Grok may trigger Cloudflare/captcha especially for username/password auth (docs warn of this).
  • Grok functionality requires agent-twitter-client v0.0.19+; the package description/README notes current basic functionality uses v0.0.18 and demo flags may install v0.0.19.
  • Grok has rate limits (non-premium: 25 messages/2 hours per README) and the MCP returns rate limit info only when limits are reached.
  • Agent workflows may repeatedly trigger mutation tools unless the agent host implements throttling/guardrails.

Alternatives

Full Evaluation Report

Comprehensive deep-dive: security analysis, reliability audit, agent experience review, cost modeling, competitive positioning, and improvement roadmap for agent-twitter-client-mcp.

AI-powered analysis · PDF + markdown · Delivered within 30 minutes

$99

Package Brief

Quick verdict, integration guide, cost projections, gotchas with workarounds, and alternatives comparison.

Delivered within 10 minutes

$3

Score Monitoring

Get alerted when this package's AF, security, or reliability scores change significantly. Stay ahead of regressions.

Continuous monitoring

$3/mo

Scores are editorial opinions as of 2026-03-30.

8642
Packages Evaluated
17761
Need Evaluation
586
Need Re-evaluation
Community Powered