A
licenseB
qualityA
maintenanceEnables automated web accessibility scans for WCAG compliance using Playwright and Axe-core, providing visual and JSON reports with remediation guidance.
25
1,976
56
MIT
Playwright Accessibility Testing MCP Server
by PashaBoiko
Related Servers
Alternatives to Playwright Accessibility Testing MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI-first accessibility testing by investigating pages, explaining findings, and applying fixes via natural language, integrated with Playwright tests and local or cloud AI models.MIT
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to perform comprehensive accessibility audits on websites using Playwright and axe-core against WCAG standards. Provides detailed compliance reports with violation summaries and remediation guidance across multiple browsers.3-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables accessibility testing using Playwright and Axe, allowing users to scan URLs, HTML content, and batches for violations, and summarize results.121MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents to perform real-browser accessibility scanning of localhost pages using Playwright and axe-core, returning WCAG 2.1 violations with structured fix plans.3931MIT
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables accessibility testing of websites and HTML content using axe-core and IBM Equal Access engines. Supports WCAG compliance checking, multi-viewport testing, and provides detailed violation reports with remediation guidance.51-
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Scored across 2 tools
Disambiguation4/5
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: a11y_scanInteractiveByText focuses on testing components via visible text/labels for natural language scenarios, while a11y_scanUrl handles URL-based or element-specific scanning. There is minor potential for confusion since both perform accessibility scans, but their different input methods (text vs. URL/element) and use cases (interactive components vs. general pages) make them mostly distinguishable.
Naming Consistency5/5
Both tools follow a consistent naming pattern with the prefix 'a11y_scan' followed by descriptive suffixes (InteractiveByText and Url). They use snake_case uniformly, and the names clearly indicate their distinct functionalities, making them predictable and easy to understand.
Tool Count3/5
With only two tools, the server feels thin for an accessibility testing domain, which might involve more operations like generating reports, filtering results, or testing specific WCAG criteria. However, the tools cover core scanning functionalities, so it's borderline but not severely lacking.
Completeness3/5
The server provides basic scanning capabilities for URLs and interactive components, but there are notable gaps. Missing operations include result analysis tools (e.g., summarize findings, export reports), configuration options (e.g., custom rule sets), and follow-up actions (e.g., retest after fixes). This limits agents to scanning without deeper workflow support.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues