Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
Metadrama

obscura-mcp

Official
by Metadrama
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

obscura-mcp

一个用于 Obscura 的 MCP 服务器适配器，Obscura 是一个用于网页抓取和 AI 智能体自动化的轻量级 Rust 无头浏览器。

通过简洁的 MCP 接口公开 Obscura 原生的 CDP 功能 —— 无需 Chrome 依赖，无需重量级的浏览器自动化。

安装

npm install -g obscura-mcp

安装是即时的 —— 浏览器二进制文件（约 80 MB）会在首次使用时延迟下载。

安装后，您可以：

  • 运行 obscura-mcp install 以可见的进度下载二进制文件，或者

  • 直接运行 obscura-mcp —— 它会自动下载二进制文件并启动服务器

二进制文件缓存于 ~/.obscura/bin/，在 npm 升级后依然保留。

要使用自定义二进制路径：

export OBSCURA_PATH=/path/to/obscura

Related MCP server: Algonius Browser

快速开始

# Install
npm install -g obscura-mcp

# Verify
obscura-mcp --version

# Download browser binary
obscura-mcp install

# Start MCP server
obscura-mcp --transport stdio

工具

browse_url

使用 Obscura 的 CDP 引擎获取 URL。返回页面内容。

参数：

  • url (string, 必填): 要访问的 HTTP 或 HTTPS URL。

  • dump (string, 可选): html、text 或 links。默认为 html。

  • cookies (array, 可选): 导航前注入的 Cookie。接受与 browse_cookies 返回格式相同的格式 —— 传入从真实浏览器导出的 Cookie 以访问已认证的页面。

  • stealth (boolean, 可选): 为兼容性而接受。隐身行为由 Obscura 服务器控制。

browse_evaluate

导航到 URL 并在页面上下文中执行 JavaScript。返回评估结果。

参数：

  • url (string, 必填): 要访问的 URL。

  • expression (string, 必填): 要评估的 JavaScript 表达式。示例：document.title、navigator.userAgent、document.querySelector('h1').textContent。

  • stealth (boolean, 可选): 为兼容性而接受。

browse_cookies

导航到 URL 并检索页面设置的所有 Cookie。返回每个 Cookie 的名称、值、域、路径和过期时间。

参数：

  • url (string, 必填): 要访问的 URL。

  • stealth (boolean, 可选): 为兼容性而接受。

配置

Claude Desktop / Cline / Continue / 任何 MCP 客户端

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "obscura-mcp": {
      "command": "obscura-mcp",
      "args": ["--transport", "stdio"]
    }
  }
}

VS Code (Cline 扩展)

{
  "servers": {
    "obscura-mcp": {
      "command": "obscura-mcp",
      "args": ["--transport", "stdio"]
    }
  }
}

全局 npm 安装后，obscura-mcp 就在您的 PATH 中 —— 无需绝对路径。

环境变量

变量

默认值

描述

OBSCURA_PATH

—

自定义 Obscura 二进制文件的路径

MCP_HTTP_HOST

127.0.0.1

HTTP 传输主机

MCP_HTTP_PORT

3000

HTTP 传输端口

MCP_TRANSPORT

stdio

传输模式：stdio 或 streamable-http

OBSCURA_STARTUP_TIMEOUT_MS

15000

等待 Obscura CDP 启动的毫秒数

OBSCURA_NAVIGATION_WAIT_MS

3000

页面导航后等待的毫秒数

CDP_REQUEST_TIMEOUT_MS

10000

等待 CDP 响应的毫秒数

为什么选择 Obscura？

  • 无 Chrome —— 纯 Rust，没有 200 MB 的浏览器包

  • CDP 原生 —— 直接公开 Chrome DevTools Protocol

  • 反检测 —— 内置针对反爬虫网站的隐身功能

  • 极小占用 —— 约 15 MB 的二进制文件，毫秒级启动

许可证

MIT

Available Tools

3 tools
browse_cookiesA

Navigate to a URL and retrieve all cookies set by the page. Returns cookie name, value, domain, path, and expiry for each cookie.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe URL to visit
stealthNoAccepted for compatibility. Stealth behavior is controlled by the Obscura server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

While annotations are absent, the description explains the stealth parameter's acceptance for compatibility and that actual behavior is server-controlled, adding some transparency. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like network requests, cookie setting by the page, or any required permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description consists of two efficient sentences: the first states the purpose, the second details return fields. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and simple parameters, the description covers the core purpose and return structure. However, it omits error handling (e.g., invalid URL), edge cases (empty cookie set), and lacks usage context relative to siblings, leaving some gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value for the stealth parameter by clarifying it is accepted but not effective, but for the url parameter it merely restates the schema. Overall, moderately helpful beyond schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Navigate' and 'retrieve', the resource 'URL' and 'cookies', and specifies the scope 'all cookies set by the page'. It also lists the returned fields, making the tool's function unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like browse_url or browse_evaluate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (browse_url, browse_evaluate). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or alternative use cases, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

browse_evaluateA

Navigate to a URL and execute JavaScript in the page context. Returns the evaluated result as a string. Supports extracting data, clicking elements, filling forms, and reading page state.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe URL to visit
expressionYesJavaScript expression to evaluate in the page context. The result is JSON-stringified. Examples: 'document.title', 'navigator.userAgent', 'document.querySelector("h1").textContent'
stealthNoAccepted for compatibility. Stealth behavior is controlled by the Obscura server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals the tool modifies page state (via clicking/filling forms) and returns stringified results, but omits details on side effects (e.g., session changes, error handling).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the primary action, the second lists capabilities, making it efficient and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the main purpose and common use cases. However, it lacks details on return format for failures or async evaluation, slightly limiting completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3). The description adds value for the 'stealth' parameter by explaining compatibility and server control, and the 'expression' examples help, but overall schema already defines parameters clearly.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool navigates to a URL and executes JavaScript, listing specific capabilities like extracting data, clicking elements, filling forms, and reading page state. It distinguishes from siblings (browse_cookies, browse_url) by focusing on script evaluation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description lists supported actions but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks when-not guidance or mention of sibling tools, leaving context implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

browse_urlA

Fetch a URL using Obscura's lightweight CDP engine. To access authenticated pages, pass cookies previously exported from browse_cookies.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe URL to visit
dumpNoThe format to return content inhtml
cookiesNoOptional cookies to inject before navigation. Accepts the same format as returned by browse_cookies — an array of objects with at least name and value. Pass cookies exported from a real browser session to access authenticated pages.
stealthNoAccepted for compatibility. Stealth behavior is controlled by the Obscura server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. Description mentions 'lightweight CDP engine' and that stealth behavior is server-controlled, but lacks details on rendering, timeouts, or error handling, leaving significant behavioral aspects unspecified.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by key guidance. No unnecessary words; every sentence serves a purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While purpose and authentication context are covered, the absence of output schema and lack of details about behavior (e.g., whether it executes JavaScript, timeouts) mean an agent may need more information to use the tool effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds value by contextualizing cookies usage (linking to browse_cookies) and explaining stealth as compatibility, going slightly beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool fetches a URL using Obscura's CDP engine, and it distinguishes from siblings browse_cookies and browse_evaluate by focusing on URL fetching.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly tells when to use cookies for authenticated pages and references browse_cookies as the source, but does not provide guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives beyond cookies.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 3 tool updatesv0.1.0
    • First observedbrowse_cookies
    • First observedbrowse_evaluate
    • First observedbrowse_url
Deploy Server
Context Every Agent Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and keep it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct purpose: retrieving cookies, executing JavaScript, and fetching a URL. There is no ambiguity between the three operations.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the consistent pattern 'browse_<operation>', using snake_case and a common prefix, ensuring predictability.

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, the surface is thin for a browser automation server. It covers basic actions but feels minimal, so it is borderline appropriate.

Completeness3/5

The set covers URL fetching, cookie extraction, and JS execution, but lacks direct interaction tools (e.g., clicking, form filling, waiting). Workarounds are possible via JS, but gaps exist.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • scraperapi-mcp-server by scraperapi

    scraperapi-mcp-serverofficial

    scraperapi
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A local MCP server that lets AI agents bypass bot detection, geo-restrictions, and JavaScript rendering challenges when scraping the web, backed by ScraperAPI's services
    28
    5
    MIT
  • Algonius Browser by algonius

    Algonius Browserofficial

    algonius
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    An open-source MCP server that provides browser automation capabilities to external AI systems, enabling navigation, DOM interaction, and web content extraction.
    20
    Apache 2.0

  • Cloudflare Playwright MCP

    haruhi2ux
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    An MCP server that enables AI agents to automate browser interactions using Playwright and Cloudflare Workers, supporting tasks like navigation, clicking, typing, and screenshots.
    9,525 npm
    Apache 2.0

  • krwl3r

    garciarsdiego
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    MCP server for web scraping and browser automation, enabling AI agents to extract clean, token-efficient content from web pages.
    1
    MIT