Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to BrowserMesh

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for managing and controlling multiple isolated Chrome/Edge browser instances, exposing tools for navigation, screenshots, clicking, form filling, and JavaScript execution to AI clients.
      7 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local MCP server that lets AI agents and human operators drive isolated Chromium profiles with their own cookies, fingerprints, and proxies, exposing tools for navigation, clicking, typing, extraction, screenshots, JavaScript evaluation, tabs, cookies, and waits. Because session and login state persist per profile, agents can carry out real authenticated workflows across sessions.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that gives AI clients direct control over driverless Chromium browsers through the Chrome DevTools Protocol, enabling agents to navigate pages, click, type, inspect the DOM, capture console and network traces, and manage tabs, cookies, and storage. It supports persistent profiles, proxy and locale alignment, and a live VNC viewer so users can build, test, and debug web automations interactively.
      70
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server that lets AI agents drive the locally installed Chrome or Edge, opening pages, taking compact accessibility-tree snapshots with @e references, and clicking, typing, scrolling, or capturing screenshots. It also exposes multi-account and cross-channel tab switching, tab sync rules, and ad-block/perf statistics.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server that lets AI agents drive your real Chromium browser with your existing signed-in sessions, providing visible, local, and inspectable automation for tasks like navigation, clicking, typing, and form filling.
      25
      1
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 35 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Every tool maps to a distinct resource or action: session lifecycle, page lifecycle, navigation, history, interaction, observation, waiting, and state persistence. Even adjacent tools like wait vs action_and_wait and scroll vs scroll_into_view are clearly separated by trigger semantics and intended use.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All names share the browser_ prefix and snake_case style, and most follow a predictable action-plus-target pattern such as session_create, page_list, get_url, and select_option. Minor deviations like browser_snapshot, browser_visible_text, and browser_forward/back break the strict verb_noun pattern but remain readable and recognizable.

    Tool Count2/5

    35 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and will feel heavy for agents to scan, even though browser automation is a broad domain. Many interaction tools are individually justified, but several could be consolidated or grouped without losing clarity.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers full session and page lifecycles, navigation, history, state persistence, observation, waiting, and a rich set of interaction actions, so most workflows have no dead ends. Minor gaps remain, such as file upload/download handling, post-creation viewport or context updates, and direct cookie or storage inspection, but agents can usually work around them.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessNo issues