browser-mcp-server
Related Servers
Alternatives to browser-mcp-server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA comprehensive browser automation MCP server using Playwright, offering 50+ tools for page control, element interaction, content extraction, and more across multiple browser engines.11 npm1MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA browser automation server providing Playwright capabilities for controlling web browsers, capturing screenshots, extracting content, and performing complex interactions through an MCP interface.6Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides structured control of a Playwright browser for QA, scraping, diagnostics, and reproducible browser workflows.6,888 npmMIT
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server for generic browser automation using Playwright. Enables MCP clients to navigate pages, inspect elements, execute JavaScript, capture screenshots, and monitor console logs and network traffic via a headless Chromium instance.7-
- AlicenseBqualityNot gradedmaintenanceA MCP server that provides browser automation tools, allowing users to navigate websites, take screenshots, click elements, fill forms, and execute JavaScript through Playwright.82Apache 2.0
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA universal browser automation server featuring 63 tools for programmatic Chrome control, multi-tab management, and media interaction using Playwright. It enables advanced actions like session recording, performance profiling, and pixel-based interaction through a safe, isolated browser profile.6310 npm1MIT
TDQS
Scored across 63 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with descriptions that precisely differentiate actions (e.g., browser_click vs browser_mouse_click, browser_get_dom vs browser_read_page). The category prefixes (net_, perf_, sec_, etc.) further aid disambiguation, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool.
All tools use the snake_case 'browser_' prefix, with subcategory prefixes (e.g., net_, perf_, sec_) for most tools. While some tools lack a subcategory (e.g., browser_get_dom) and the pattern varies slightly, the overall consistency is high and predictable.
With 63 tools, the server far exceeds the typical well-scoped range (3-15). Despite the broad domain of browser automation, this many tools indicate potential over-splitting, and the calibration guidelines deem 50+ as an extreme mismatch.
The tool set covers a comprehensive range of browser automation tasks: navigation, interaction, DOM, network, performance, security, storage, console, media, etc. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no cookie or dialog handling), but the surface is largely complete for its domain.