Citing bibliographical info depends on what publication you are writing for. Date of composition is usually more significant than first performance, unless the latter was a major event or drew much attention at the time.
As said by Robin,it depends on the referencing or citational style.Its also possible to create a section for discography where detailed information are added.
It's complicated. There are many instances where the date which the composer wrote on the MS as an 'endpoint' proves to be provisional, and where the performance dates are more relevant. If one takes a work such as Dvorak's great String Quintet (with 2 violas) each movement is dated, which is interesting, but oddly troubling! I have just received a score from a composer who has been working on it for me since 2005. It's now ;finished, but there have been many performances along the way.
The date of the composition is recommended for citation. Some pop artistes compose their works long before recording them while others are released even after the death of he artiste; that, citing the year of publication engenders contradiction in the period the artiste lived in. However, one will suggest that publishers should specify the actual date the work was composed so that scholars can both see the year of creativity and that of publication.
You should include both dates where the information is available; especially for contemporary composition. With the ease of almost immediate digital transfer, there may be implications as to the popularity or further development of compositions depending on responses to a performance or publication.