1. Yes, the extension uses an anonymous device ID and sends an analytics event when a tool call is used. You can inspect the network traffic to verify that zero personalized or identifying information is sent.
I collect anonymized usage data to get an idea of how often people are using the extension in the same way that websites count visitors. I split my time between many projects and having a sense of how many active users there are is helpful for deciding which ones to focus on.
2. The extension is completely written by me, and I wrote in this GitHub issue why the repo currently only contains the MCP server (in short, I use a monorepo that contains code used by all my extensions and extracting this extension and maintaining multiple monorepos while keeping them in sync would require quite a bit of work): https://github.com/BrowserMCP/mcp/issues/1#issuecomment-2784...
I understand that you're frustrated with the way I've built this project, but there's really nothing nefarious going on here. Cheers!
I just published a new version of the @browsermcp/mcp library (version 0.1.1) that handles the error better until I can investigate further so it should hopefully work now if you're using @browsermcp/mcp@latest.
Thanks for the report and the update! I'd love to hear about what you changed — how can I get in touch? I didn't see anything in your HN profile. Feel free to email me at [email protected]
Browser MCP uses the Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP) to automate the browser so it currently only works for Chromium-based browsers.
Unfortunately, Firefox doesn't expose WebDriver BiDi (the standardized version of CDP) to browser extensions AFAIK (someone please correct me if I'm mistaken!), so I don't think I can support it even if I tried.
Of course, you're sending data to the AI model, but the "private" aspect is contrasting automating using a local browser vs. automating using a remote browser.
When you automate using a remote browser, another service (not the AI model) gets all of the browsing activity and any information you send (e.g. usernames and passwords) that's required for the automation.
With Browser MCP, since you're automating locally, your sensitive data and browser activity (apart from the results of MCP tool calls that's sent to the AI model) stay on your device.
An extension is more user-friendly! I leave Chrome open basically 24/7 and having to create a new Chrome instance via the command line just to use Browser MCP just felt like too high of a barrier.
The Puppeteer MCP server doesn't work well because it requires CSS selectors to interact with elements. It makes up CSS selectors rather than reading the page and generating working selectors.
The Playwright MCP server is great! Currently Browser MCP is largely an adaptation of the Playwright MCP server to use with your actual browser rather than creating a new one each time. This allows you to reuse your existing Chrome profile so that you don't need to log in to each service all over again and avoids bot detection which often triggers when using the fresh browser instances created by Playwright.
I also plan to add other useful tools (e.g. Browser MCP currently supports a tool to get the console logs which is useful for automated debugging) which will likely diverge from the Playwright MCP server features.
I actually built a Chrome extension that runs Claude computer use if you’d like to try it out! [0] It’s currently awaiting approval in the Chrome Web Store.
After having spent the last several years building a popular Chrome extension for browser automation [1], I was excited to see if LLMs could actually build automations end-to-end based on a high-level description. Unfortunately, they still get confused quite easily so the holy grail has yet to come. Still fun to play around with though!
For structured content (e.g. lists of items, simple tables), you really don’t need LLMs.
I recently built a web scraper to automatically work on any website [0] and built the initial version using AI, but I found that using heuristics based on element attributes and positioning ended up being faster, cheaper, and more accurate (no hallucinations!).
For most websites, the non-AI approach works incredibly well so I’d make sure AI is really necessary (e.g. data is unstructured, need to derive or format the output based on the page data) before incorporating it.
Yup, it covers JS navigation. I spent the last four years building a browser automation tool (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29254147) so I was able to cover a lot of bases with Easy Scraper. Try it out!
1. Yes, the extension uses an anonymous device ID and sends an analytics event when a tool call is used. You can inspect the network traffic to verify that zero personalized or identifying information is sent.
I collect anonymized usage data to get an idea of how often people are using the extension in the same way that websites count visitors. I split my time between many projects and having a sense of how many active users there are is helpful for deciding which ones to focus on.
2. The extension is completely written by me, and I wrote in this GitHub issue why the repo currently only contains the MCP server (in short, I use a monorepo that contains code used by all my extensions and extracting this extension and maintaining multiple monorepos while keeping them in sync would require quite a bit of work): https://github.com/BrowserMCP/mcp/issues/1#issuecomment-2784...
I understand that you're frustrated with the way I've built this project, but there's really nothing nefarious going on here. Cheers!