Skip to main content
Glama
prembobby39-gif

UserFlow MCP

by prembobby39-gif
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to UserFlow MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • blindqa

      DevZonayed
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to drive a real browser like a person — crawling every page and role, running real user journeys, and auditing controls a DOM-based test misses — so UI, accessibility and permission bugs are found and only the screens affected by recent changes are re-tested. Runs are script-driven and read-only by default, so testing costs no model tokens and nothing about the app is sent to an AI.
      MIT

    • Argus

      chriswu727
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      AI-powered exploratory QA agent. Explores web apps like a real user — 18 MCP tools for clicking, filling forms, and navigating. Automatically verifies that actions persist (fake deletes, failed edits). Runs 16 detection types including dead links, SEO, accessibility, and performance checks.
      29
      46 PyPI
      2
      MIT

    • crowd-test-mcp

      anhhuyn411-alt
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      ▎ Enables AI assistants to unleash a crowd of role-played virtual users — impatient shoppers, seniors, keyboard-only users, privacy hawks, chaos monkeys — on a website. Each persona browses in a real Chromium browser, files UX/QA findings in character, and the site receives a damage report with an S–F survival grade. Accusations can be cross-examined by up to three independent verification engines
      1
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

    TDQS

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 14 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes: session control (start/step/end), observation (get_page_state), analysis (accessibility_audit, inspect_storage, export_har, compare_screenshots), and persona/device management. The only possible confusion is between start_session and quick_scan, both navigate but one establishes a session; descriptions clarify this. Overall, tools are well-differentiated.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Tool names are predominantly verb_noun (start_session, get_page_state, create_persona), but some deviate with adjective_noun or single-word names (quick_scan, auto_walk, step). All use snake_case, which maintains readability, but the inconsistency in grammatical pattern reduces predictability.

    Tool Count4/5

    14 tools cover the full user flow testing lifecycle without feeling bloated. Each tool addresses a specific concern: session control, page inspection, accessibility, storage/network analysis, persona management, and automated comparisons. The count is appropriate for the comprehensive feature set.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the core lifecycle (start/step/end), plus useful extensions like accessibility audits, storage/HAR inspection, and persona-based automated testing. Minor gaps exist (no update/delete persona, no resize viewport beyond device profiles), but they don't hinder the primary use case. Overall, the domain is well-covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources