Aether WCAG Scanner vs Browsegrab

In-depth architectural comparison of the Aether WCAG Scanner and Browsegrab MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

A

Choose Aether WCAG Scanner when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Browser Automation domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Aether WCAG Scanner Details

Choose Browsegrab when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Browser Automation domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Browsegrab Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	A Aether WCAG Scanner Browser Automation	Browsegrab Browser Automation
Summary	WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility scanner (Playwright + axe-core) with grounded, browser-verified fixes.	Token-efficient browser agent for local LLMs. Playwright + accessibility tree + MarkGrab.
Category & Scope	Browser Automation	Browser Automation

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "aether-wcag-scanner": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "aether-wcag-scanner"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "browsegrab": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "browsegrab"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons