layout-doctor-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to layout-doctor-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI-driven visual QA by capturing web pages and comparing screenshots with SSIM to detect visual regressions, changed regions, and previews, while supporting authenticated sessions and OAuth for apps behind login.18MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables CSS layout verification and debugging by extracting deterministic, diffable rendered layout from a browser, allowing agents to inspect, explain, and diff CSS changes.16 npm2MIT
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to render HTML and audit its typography using book-quality Knuth–Plass line breaking, hyphenation, and microtypography in a headless browser, returning markup diagnostics and a page screenshot for visual, iterative CSS refinement.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents to audit rendered web pages for design and UI defects by measuring geometry, styles, contrast and motion in a local browser and judging them against evidence-tiered rules. Findings come back as short, fixable items expressed in the project's own design tokens, while only sanitized numeric measurements leave the machine.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents to see, measure, and verify web pages through a real Chrome browser, including screenshots, responsive layout and accessibility audits, pixel diffing against baselines, secure logins, and deployed-fix verification.271MIT
- FlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI-assisted visual regression testing by capturing baselines, comparing screenshots, and using AI to judge whether visual differences are bugs or acceptable changes.4-
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion or incorrect selection. The tool uniquely targets layout checking with a clear and comprehensive role. Disambiguation is trivially perfect.
The single tool name 'layout_check' follows a clear verb-noun pattern (check the layout) and accurately describes its function. Since there is no other tool to compare patterns, the consistency is essentially unqualified, but a perfect 5 would require a larger set. A 4 reflects the lack of pattern evidence rather than any inconsistency.
The server has only one tool, which per the rubric is considered too few for a typical tool server. While the tool itself is comprehensive and covers many layout-checks, the extreme minimalism limits workflow flexibility and integration. This falls into the 'too few' category rather than the borderline 1-2 range.
The tool covers a wide range of layout-detection features (overlap, overflow, truncation, horizontal scroll, unresolved references, id duplication, invisible text), and explicitly excludes unrelated areas like accessibility and design evaluation. For its stated purpose of layout diagnostics, the surface is remarkably complete. However, the lack of any companion tools (e.g., to fix issues or compare against a baseline) creates a minor gap in a full workflow, so it doesn't earn a perfect 5.