Ainative Browser MCP vs DOMShell

In-depth architectural comparison of the Ainative Browser MCP and DOMShell 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?

Choose Ainative Browser MCP 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).
• Primary tools included: browser_act, browser_extract, browser_validate.

Explore Ainative Browser MCP Details

Choose DOMShell 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).
• Primary tools included: Maps browser tabs and windows to directories, Represents DOM elements as files and folders via Accessibility Tree, Supports standard Linux commands for navigation and interaction.

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Ainative Browser MCP Browser Automation	DOMShell apireno Browser Automation
Summary	AI-powered browser automation MCP — 6 tools for web interaction, extraction, and validation.	Browse the web using filesystem commands (ls, cd, grep, click). 38 MCP tools map Chrome's Accessibility Tree to a virtual filesystem via a Chrome Extension.
Category & Scope	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": {
    "ainative-browser-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@ainative/browser-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "apireno-domshell": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@apireno/domshell"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons