Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to opticparse

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents in Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Gemini CLI and Codex to scrape web pages into Markdown, text, HTML, JSON or PDF, extract structured data with selectors or autoparse, capture screenshots and PDFs the model can see, drive pages with typed browser actions, keep logged-in persistent browser sessions, and batch-scrape thousands of URLs as async jobs. It also exposes usage, request-log and documentation tools so agents can check costs, diagnose failures and look up parameters without leaving the chat.
      25
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Provides an LLM client with self-hosted web scraping capabilities including scraping, crawling, mapping, searching, structured data extraction, browser interaction, and deep research, without reliance on paid proxy or CAPTCHA services.
      4
      GPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol (MCP) integration that provides Claude Desktop with autonomous browser automation capabilities. This agent enables Claude to interact with web content, manipulate DOM elements, execute JavaScript, and perform API requests.
      13
      18 npm
      41
      TypeScript
      Mozilla Public 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides browser automation, AI-powered analysis, visual processing, web scraping, automated test generation, and DevTools analysis capabilities. Supports multiple AI providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Ollama) for intelligent web interaction and data extraction.
      1
      -

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    opticparse_scrape extracts page content for LLM/RAG use, while phishvision_detect audits URLs for security threats. Their purposes, outputs, and trigger conditions are clearly distinct, so an agent should not confuse them.

    Naming Consistency2/5

    Both names follow a product_verb pattern and use snake_case, but the product prefix changes from opticparse to phishvision. This breaks the expected consistency for a server named opticparse and makes the second tool feel unrelated.

    Tool Count3/5

    Two tools is on the thin side for a server that claims to cover web scraping and phishing detection. Each tool serves a distinct high-level purpose, but the overall surface feels minimal rather than well-rounded.

    Completeness3/5

    The two tools cover the core stated capabilities: extracting structured page data and detecting phishing URLs. However, there are notable gaps such as no batch processing, no non-URL input support, and no way to refine or iterate on extraction results.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessNo issues