Skip to main content
Glama
betson-g
by betson-g

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v2.0.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools, making disambiguation perfect. The tool's description clearly outlines its distinct purpose of inspecting browser pages, with no competing tools to cause misselection.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name 'browser_inspect' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, and with no other tools to compare, there are no deviations or inconsistencies in naming conventions.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is too few for a server named 'browser-inspector-mcp', which suggests a broader scope for browser inspection tasks. While the tool covers multiple actions (dom, styles, screenshot, diff), the server feels thin and under-scoped, as typical inspection domains might benefit from more specialized or separate tools.

    Completeness3/5

    The tool provides core inspection actions (dom, styles, screenshot, diff), but there are notable gaps for a browser inspector, such as missing tools for network monitoring, JavaScript debugging, performance analysis, or element interaction. This limits the server's ability to fully cover browser inspection workflows, though the included actions are useful for basic CSS and DOM tasks.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing
  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
      "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
      "maintainers": [
        "your-github-username"
      ]
    }

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does well by explaining the four available actions and their purposes, and mentions browser tab reuse behavior ('Optional on subsequent calls — reuses the open browser tab'). However, it doesn't cover important behavioral aspects like performance implications, error handling, authentication requirements, or rate limits that would be crucial for a browser inspection tool.

    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 is perfectly structured and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. Each subsequent sentence adds valuable information without redundancy. The four actions are clearly enumerated, and the 'help' guidance is efficiently included. Every sentence earns its place, making this an excellent example of concise, well-structured documentation.

    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 the tool's moderate complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description does well by explaining the core purpose, available actions, and usage context. However, without annotations or output schema, it should ideally provide more behavioral context about what results to expect, error conditions, or performance characteristics. The description is comprehensive for basic usage but leaves some operational details unspecified.

    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?

    The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters thoroughly. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the tool's overall purpose and the four action types, which helps the agent understand the semantic relationship between parameters. While it doesn't add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, it provides valuable high-level context that enhances parameter understanding.

    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's purpose with specific verbs ('inspects', 'gets', 'captures', 'compares') and resources ('live browser page', 'CSS and DOM information', 'DevTools data'). It explicitly distinguishes what this tool provides ('what the browser actually renders') versus alternatives ('not just what the source code says'), making the purpose highly specific and well-defined.

    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?

    The description provides clear context for when to use the tool ('before writing or debugging CSS to verify what the browser actually renders') and offers guidance for uncertain situations ('Call with action 'help' if unsure'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or name specific alternatives, as there are no sibling tools mentioned. The guidance is practical but lacks exclusion criteria.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

browser-inspector-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

browser-inspector-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/betson-g/browser-inspector-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server