Skip to main content
Glama
bornmw

marionette-mcp

by bornmw
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to marionette-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • browser-control

      kierandrewett
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to control existing Chrome and Firefox browser sessions locally, including tab management, navigation, form filling, screenshots, and persistent scripts, without remote relays or debugging ports.
      8
      -

    • gecko-mcp

      Frumane
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Drive Firefox-based browsers (Floorp, LibreWolf, Zen, Waterfox, Mullvad, Firefox) from any MCP client — read pages, screenshot, click, fill forms and manage tabs in your real session, over Marionette/WebDriver. OS input & JS eval locked by default.
      41
      46
      2
      MIT

    • FoxBridge MCP

      sinamohsenifar
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to read and drive a real, logged-in Firefox browser, including tabs, cookies, history, and site interactions, all through the Model Context Protocol.
      52
      18
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.2/5.0

    Scored across 18 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct browser automation concern: navigation, page state, element actions, windows, alerts, cookies, and evaluation. There is minimal overlap, and similar-sounding tools like fx_window vs fx_windows are clearly differentiated by singular/plural usage and descriptions.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools share the fx_ prefix and use lowercase names without mixed case or underscores, which is a predictable pattern. There is a slight mix of verb-style names like fx_navigate and fx_click with noun-style names like fx_page and fx_cookies, but the overall convention remains coherent.

    Tool Count4/5

    Eighteen tools is slightly above the typical 3-15 range, but each tool covers a distinct and necessary browser automation action. The count feels justified for the scope, though a few could be consolidated without much loss.

    Completeness4/5

    The set covers core browser automation workflows: navigation, interaction, snapshots, waiting, screenshots, window management, alerts, cookies, and JS evaluation. Minor gaps exist such as no dedicated back/forward/refresh or cookie mutation, but fx_eval can compensate for many advanced needs.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources