Skip to main content
Glama
Smart Browser MCP

Smart Browser MCP

Related Servers

Alternatives to Smart Browser MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and MCP hosts to drive a persistent headless Chromium browser through Playwright, navigating pages, mapping visible fields and actions, clicking, typing, scrolling, and capturing screenshots via stdio tool calls. It also powers a local AI Test Studio dashboard that generates and runs structured end-to-end test plans with assertions, per-step timing, and screenshot evidence.
      4
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to crawl live DOMs into compact accessibility maps, generate frontend and backend test plans, execute self-healing Playwright QA locally without token replay, and compile passing flows into native .spec.ts files.
      1
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to automate and debug real Chromium browsers with capabilities like screenshots, video recording, performance analysis, visual regression testing, and OCR text extraction.
      13
      -
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and developers to automate real Chrome/Chromium browsers through the Chrome DevTools Protocol, with token-efficient snapshots, multi-action batching, shadow DOM traversal, system-page control, extension management, and network/WebSocket inspection.
      81
      1
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 39 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there is some overlap among browser_snapshot, browser_analyze_page, browser_observe, browser_elements, and browser_mark_screenshot. The descriptions clarify when to use each, so an agent can disambiguate, but the boundaries are not perfectly crisp.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent pattern of either 'browser_' or 'api_' prefix followed by snake_case action or noun (e.g., browser_click, api_assert). The naming is uniform and predictable across the entire set, making it easy to infer functionality.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 39 tools, the server is significantly over the typical 3-15 range. Even considering the broad scope of covering both browser automation and API testing, the count feels excessive and likely introduces redundancy (e.g., multiple observation and snapshot tools). This may overwhelm agents and complicate tool selection.

    Completeness5/5

    The toolset covers browser automation comprehensively: navigation, interaction, observation, screenshots, tabs, flows, memory, error handling, and human verification. API testing is also thorough, with request, assertion, suite management, and error tracking. There are no obvious critical gaps for the stated dual purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessSyncing