Customaise vs Tampermonkey
The half-hour JavaScript project is now a one-line description. Drop your existing library in unchanged. And AgentScripts open a category Tampermonkey has no answer for: typed tools your AI agent calls on a site you're already signed into.
Customaise vs Tampermonkey: write userscripts from your IDE agent through Customaise's MCP server. Full .user.js directive parity, plus AgentScripts.
When should you use Customaise vs Tampermonkey?
You use an IDE agent (Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity, Kiro) and want it to write userscripts and act on real signed-in pages on your own subscription. Or you want cross-device sync without DIY-ing it. The lighter in-browser AI is there too for quick in-page fixes.
When is Tampermonkey the better pick over Customaise?
You have a working library you wrote by hand, you do not use an AI editor, and you do not have an IDE agent that needs to act on web pages. Tampermonkey will keep doing what it has done for two decades.
Can you use Customaise and Tampermonkey together?
Both managers run the same .user.js format, so you can run them side by side during a transition.
Related comparisons
The full side-by-side on the page adds the comparison table row by row, with the axis-level detail behind each answer above.