Web Accessibility MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to Web Accessibility MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceProvides accessibility testing capabilities through CLI, helping identify accessibility issues in web applications using axe-core and Puppeteer.12MIT
- AlicenseBqualityAmaintenanceEnables automated web accessibility scans for WCAG compliance using Playwright and Axe-core, providing visual and JSON reports with remediation guidance.252,020 npm56MIT
- 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.8 npm1MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables web accessibility audits using axe-core, allowing users to scan URLs, check WCAG compliance levels, and export reports. It uses an anti-detect browser to bypass Cloudflare and other bot protection.7MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenancePerforms automated web accessibility audits following WCAG standards using axe-core and Puppeteer, generating detailed reports in Spanish with recommended solutions and code examples.-
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one checks general web accessibility using axe-core, while the other specifically simulates colorblindness effects on a webpage. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (check_accessibility, simulate_colorblind) with clear, descriptive names. The naming style is uniform and predictable throughout the set.
With only two tools, the server feels thin for a web accessibility domain. While the tools are useful, typical accessibility testing involves more operations like checking screen reader compatibility, keyboard navigation, or ARIA attributes, suggesting notable gaps in coverage.
The tool set is severely incomplete for web accessibility. It lacks core operations such as validating HTML structure, testing screen reader output, assessing keyboard accessibility, or generating accessibility reports, which are essential for comprehensive accessibility evaluation.