A
licenseNot graded
qualityA
maintenanceEnables plain-English browser automation via an MCP server, allowing agents to run objectives or test suites in a real browser without selectors or scripts.
63 npm
2
Apache 2.0
jev-browser-sidekick-mcp
by TechyAditya
Related Servers
Alternatives to jev-browser-sidekick-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables Cursor to drive Google Chrome through the jev-browser-use click loop, with Cursor supplying tasks, typing text, and verifying results while Jev chooses the next click.51MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables natural language-driven browser automation by launching a real browser, performing interactions, and generating test artifacts like feature/step/page files.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables Claude Code and Claude Desktop to control your own Chrome browser, with Jev deciding each click, keystroke, and scroll.5-
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to delegate complex web browsing goals to a real Chrome instance driven by Jev, completing tasks end-to-end in ~300ms per decision and returning only the final result.11830 npm5MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceLets any MCP agent control your signed-in Chrome with full login state, offering normal browser tools and an optional Fast JEV mode for bounded-speed typed decisions on the same profile.MIT
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Scored across 2 tools
Disambiguation5/5
run_action is entirely about browser automation while use_jev_raw is explicitly a non-browser decision tool. Their purposes and outputs do not overlap, so there is no risk of an agent selecting the wrong tool.
Naming Consistency4/5
Both names are snake_case and verb-first, which is mostly consistent. However, run_action follows a clean verb_noun pattern while use_jev_raw mixes a product name and an adjective, making it slightly less predictable.
Tool Count3/5
Two tools is minimal and sits at the thin end of acceptable. Each tool covers a broad area, but the server still feels sparse for something positioned as a browser sidekick.
Completeness4/5
run_action appears to consolidate multi-step browser workflows and returns statuses and handoffs, while use_jev_raw covers decision support. The main gap is a lack of separate low-level browser inspection or control tools, but the step-based design likely lets agents work around it.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues