Skip to main content
Glama
ohaoz

Codex Chrome MCP

by ohaoz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Codex Chrome MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • kilogent-browser

      codebridger
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server that lets agents drive your real Chrome browser with existing logins and sessions via an outbound-only WebSocket extension. It exposes Playwright-compatible browser tools for navigation, clicking, typing, and snapshots.
      1
      Apache 2.0

    • Playwright MCP Server

      tomscoppock
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and clients to control a real Chromium browser through MCP tool calls, including navigation, clicking, typing, JavaScript evaluation, screenshots, and DOM snapshots. Supports multiple isolated sessions over authenticated HTTP with no disk writes.
      Apache 2.0

    • browser-mcp

      ruggieroromulo
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Local browser automation MCP server for Claude Code, enabling navigation, clicking, typing, and inspecting real web pages via Google Chrome.
      18 npm
      1
      MIT

    • Playwright MCP

      Patrick-Ogbue
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables browser automation and web scraping by exposing Playwright tools through an HTTP-based MCP server. Users can navigate pages, interact with web elements, capture screenshots, and extract structured content using a persistent Chromium instance.
      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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 20 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools are clearly distinct: navigation, interaction, CDP, session management. However, browser documentation, browser_exec, and eval_js have some overlap in the 'run code against browser' space, and list_user_tabs vs list_tabs are subtly different but well-explained. The click/type_text/press_key/scroll interaction tools are well-differentiated.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    There's a mix of conventions: some verb_noun pairs (list_user_tabs, claim_tab, type_text, press_key, fetch_url), some bare verbs (goto, scroll, click, snapshot), and a few camelCase (browser_exec, eval_js, cdp_send, cdp_events). The underscore convention dominates but lacks a uniform verb_noun pattern; the presence of camelCase tools (browser_exec, eval_js, cdp_events) breaks consistency.

    Tool Count4/5

    20 tools is on the higher end but justifiable for a browser automation surface covering navigation, interaction, inspection, DOM access, network fetching, CDP, and session lifecycle. Each tool fills a genuine niche, though some (cdp_send/cdp_events, browser_exec/eval_js) overlap and could arguably be consolidated.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the full browser automation lifecycle: tab management (new/claim/list), navigation (goto), inspection (snapshot, screenshot, console logs), interaction (click, type, keys, scroll), DOM/JS access (eval_js, browser_exec), network (fetch_url), and cleanup (finalize). Minor gaps include no explicit form-submit or file-upload helper, and no tool to close a single specific tab rather than all via finalize, but these are workable via browser_exec.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources