Skip to main content
Glama
bluesky-mcp

bluesky-mcp

by thenavidm

Related Servers

Alternatives to bluesky-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to post, reply, run threads, read timelines, search, manage follows, and analyze engagement on Bluesky, with setup requiring only a handle and app password.
      41
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables interaction with Bluesky social network through the AT Protocol, including searching posts, fetching profiles, browsing feeds, and retrieving threads and follower data.
      426 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables search, reading, and posting to Bluesky from any MCP client; features 11 tools (5 read, 6 write) with gated writes requiring explicit confirmation to prevent accidental publishing.
      11
      5 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interact with Bluesky social network through optimized, token-efficient tools for posting, replying, searching, and managing social relationships. Features Windows-compatible implementation with context cleanup to minimize LLM token consumption.
      8
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables LLMs to interact with the AT Protocol ecosystem, including Bluesky, through natural language. Supports public data access without authentication and full write operations with authentication.
      51
      106 npm
      10
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interact with X (Twitter) through 10 grouped tools and 69 actions, covering reading and searching posts, publishing threads, uploading media, managing Lists, sending DMs, and viewing images and video frames. Includes read-only and dry-run modes plus credential and rate-limit checks.
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.3/5.0

    Scored across 45 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct resource-action pair: read vs. write tools are clearly separated (get_post_stats vs. rank_posts vs. get_engagement_summary cover single-post, ranked-set, and aggregate views respectively), and paired operations (like/unlike, follow/unfollow, block/unblock) are unambiguous. Descriptions actively steer selection, e.g. 'the one-post version of rank_posts'.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The set is dominated by a predictable snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_feed, create_post, mute_account, search_actors). A few deviations like whoami, get_unread_count, and mark_notifications_seen break the verb_noun convention slightly but remain readable and non-ambiguous.

    Tool Count2/5

    At 45 tools this is well past the heavy threshold for a single server surface, forcing an agent to sift through many near-neighbors before acting. The breadth is largely earned by the domain, but the count is still excessive for practical selection.

    Completeness4/5

    Coverage is unusually thorough: post lifecycle (create/thread/delete), interactions, social graph, feeds, lists, notifications, and a full engagement-analytics suite. Minor gaps remain—no direct-message/chat tools, no list creation, and no bookmark operations—but core workflows have no dead ends.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues