Skip to main content
Glama
jbuchan

Accessibility MCP Server

by jbuchan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Accessibility MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Navable MCP

      web-DnA
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to perform real-browser accessibility scanning of localhost pages using Playwright and axe-core, returning WCAG 2.1 violations with structured fix plans.
      3
      48 npm
      1
      MIT

    • Playwright Accessibility

      PashaBoiko
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables comprehensive WCAG 2.0/2.1 accessibility testing of web applications using Playwright and axe-core. Supports natural language element finding, auto-discovery of interactive components, and generates detailed compliance reports with screenshots.
      2
      -

    • a11y-mcp

      antonio-rmrz
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables 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.
      7
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_test_results retrieves specific results, list_test_results lists available files, and test_accessibility runs new tests. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these three functions.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_test_results, list_test_results, test_accessibility) with clear, descriptive names that align with their actions. There are no deviations in naming conventions.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for its accessibility testing domain, covering core operations: listing, retrieving, and running tests. It might benefit from additional tools like updating or deleting results, but the count is reasonable and not excessive.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools provide a solid foundation for accessibility testing, covering listing, retrieval, and execution. Minor gaps exist, such as the inability to update or delete test results, but agents can work around this, and the core workflow is adequately supported.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources