Skip to main content
Glama
CloakBrowser MCP

CloakBrowser MCP

by SJF-ECNU

Related Servers

Alternatives to CloakBrowser MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for controlling a local camofox-browser instance, enabling LLM agents to perform web automation tasks such as navigation, interaction, snapshotting, and content extraction.
      103 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and clients to drive and test real web browsers through the full upstream Playwright MCP tool surface, backed by CloakBrowser Chromium with persistent profiles, proxy matching, and humanized mouse, keyboard, and scroll behavior. It can be installed via npm or Docker and run over stdio or Streamable HTTP with multi-session support.
      431 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Wraps CloakBrowser, a stealth Chromium, as an MCP server for web retrieval with anti-detection features. Enables getting text, HTML, screenshots, and interactive actions via natural language.
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for browser automation with anti-detection. Scout pages, find elements, interact with websites, and monitor network traffic from any AI client that supports the Model Context Protocol.
      21
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A stealth browser automation MCP server that wraps CloakBrowser's patched Chromium to bypass bot detection, providing 22 tools for web navigation, interaction, and session management.
      24
      2
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 28 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, targeting specific browser actions like navigation, clicking, typing, or cookie management. Potential overlaps like browser_get_text and browser_snapshot are differentiated by scope (snapshot includes URL and title). No two tools are ambiguous.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools share the 'browser_' prefix, but the verb style varies: some are simple verbs (browser_click, browser_close) while others follow verb_noun (browser_clear_cookies). Minor inconsistency but still predictable and readable.

    Tool Count4/5

    28 tools is on the higher side but appropriate for a comprehensive browser automation server covering navigation, interaction, extraction, state management, and cookies. No tools seem redundant or out of scope.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set covers a wide range of browser automation needs: navigation, clicking, typing, text extraction, screenshots, JavaScript evaluation, cookies, storage, page management, and waiting. Missing advanced features like file upload or network interception, but core workflows are well covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo recent community issues