Skip to main content
Glama
surpasses

firefox-mcp

by surpasses
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to firefox-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • arc-cdp-mcp

      chmodami
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code to control the Arc browser over CDP, including navigation, clicking, form filling, screenshots, and reading console and network traffic.
      11
      MIT

    • marionette-mcp

      bornmw
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to drive a user-launched Firefox instance via its native Marionette protocol, providing precise DOM actuation like clicking, typing, uploading files, taking screenshots, and evaluating JavaScript.
      18
      18 npm
      1
      GPL 2.0

    • claude-playwright

      smartlabsAT
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables browser automation and web interaction control through Playwright, allowing Claude Code to navigate, click, fill forms, take screenshots, and manage sessions.
      299 npm
      7
      MIT

    • jevbridge

      ItaiZeilig
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code to control your actual logged-in Chrome browser through an MV3 extension, perceiving pages as element tables and performing actions such as navigation, clicks, typing, and assertions via CDP.
      8
      4
      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

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 22 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct browser automation concern—tab management, navigation, element discovery, input, scrolling, and diagnostics—so an agent can reliably select the right one. Even similar tools like read_page and find have clear separation: one lists elements, the other searches by selector/text. No two tools appear to do the same job.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Naming is readable but mixes conventions: tabs_* forms a clear prefix group, read_* and get_* group read operations, while interaction tools use bare verbs like click, type, scroll, and hover. This category-based pattern is understandable but not a uniform verb_noun convention.

    Tool Count3/5

    At 22 tools, the set is comprehensive but on the heavy side, falling into the borderline range for a single server. Most tools are individually justified for browser automation, yet some input-related tools (type, form_input, press_key) could potentially be consolidated.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers tab lifecycle, navigation, element interaction, scrolling, screenshots, scripting, and diagnostics, which is strong coverage for browser automation. Minor gaps like explicit cookie management, file upload, or waiting for a specific element exist, but agents can work around them with evaluate and wait.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources