Skip to main content
Glama
iola1999

Codex Control Chrome MCP

by iola1999

Related Servers

Alternatives to Codex Control Chrome MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Exposes Codex's Chrome plugin as an MCP server, enabling MCP clients to drive a real, logged-in Chrome browser by navigating, snapshotting the DOM, clicking, typing, taking screenshots, running Playwright, and sending raw CDP commands.
      20
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to interact with live Chrome and Chrome Dev sessions through MCP tools, including finding and focusing active tabs, evaluating JavaScript in tab DOMs or extension service workers, and capturing screenshots without remote-debugging consent modals.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Lets coding agents control and inspect a live Chrome browser via MCP, providing Chrome DevTools capabilities for automation, debugging, and performance analysis.
      1,032,112 npm
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables local opencode agents to control a live Chrome browser via MCP tools, including tab management, JavaScript execution, clicking, form filling, page reading, screenshots, and console log retrieval.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code, Codex, Devin, or any MCP client to control Chrome/Edge through the repository's browser extensions, with Claude-style visual tools or Codex-style text-first tools.
      5 npm
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    B3.2/5.0

    Scored across 16 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct function (e.g., attach, detach, claim, navigate, evaluate). While chrome_session_tabs and chrome_user_tabs both list tabs, their contexts differ (claimed vs. all user tabs), and descriptions clarify the distinction.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent 'chrome_verb_noun' snake_case pattern (e.g., chrome_attach_tab, chrome_create_tab, chrome_evaluate). No mixing of conventions or abbreviations.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 16 tools, the count is slightly above the typical well-scoped range (3-15), but each tool serves a specific purpose in Chrome tab automation (e.g., claiming, navigating, evaluating, screenshotting), justifying the number.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the full lifecycle of tab control: creation, claiming, attachment, navigation, evaluation, screenshot, and finalization. Minor gaps exist (e.g., explicit 'close tab' tool is missing, but finalize_tabs may handle it), but core workflows are complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues