Skip to main content
Glama
itk-dev

Browser Feedback MCP

by itk-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Browser Feedback MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • claude-annotate

      gerald4277
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables visual annotation on web pages for Claude Code, allowing element selection, comment addition, screenshot capture, and structured UI feedback for code fixes via an MCP server.
      MIT

    • annotate

      FinalAngel
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables users to draw marks and leave numbered notes on a running localhost page in a Chrome window, then send the batch into the active Claude Code session with each note's element, React component, source line, and screenshot. Progress and per-note results stream back onto the page, and the marks persist across navigation, all locally with no cloud.
      1
      MIT

    • draw2agent

      zero-abd
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables drawing annotations directly on local web pages and sending screenshots, DOM data, and annotation context to your IDE agent for precise code edits.
      34 npm
      3
      MIT

    • element-inspector

      FreakTwisted666
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables interactive element inspection on any website, allowing users to click elements and send detailed information (tag, classes, styles, attributes) to Claude for analysis.
      -
    Deploy Server
    Give agents eyes on the webHosted screenshot MCP. Send a URL, get a pixel-perfect image. $0.002 per grab. Works with Claude, Cursor, and Codex.grabbit.liveAd

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 12 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    The retrieval tools overlap heavily: wait_for_browser_feedback, wait_for_multiple_feedback, get_pending_feedback, and preview_pending_feedback all return feedback items and differ mainly in blocking/consuming semantics. Descriptions do clarify the distinctions, but an agent could easily pick the wrong one. The three deprecated widget tools also overlap with each other and with setup_extension.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools use consistent snake_case verb_noun form (install_widget, get_pending_feedback, wait_for_multiple_feedback, etc.). The pattern is predictable and readable throughout, with no mixed conventions.

    Tool Count4/5

    12 tools is reasonable for this scope, though three are marked deprecated, leaving effectively nine active tools. The count is slightly inflated by the legacy widget group that is being phased out in favor of the extension.

    Completeness4/5

    The domain (browser feedback collection) is well covered: installation/setup, connection status, multiple feedback retrieval modes, deletion, annotation requests, and browser opening. Coverage is strong, with only minor redundancy from the deprecated-but-retained widget tools.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessResponsive

    Resources