BrowserTap MCP vs Awx MCP Server

In-depth architectural comparison of the BrowserTap MCP and Awx MCP Server 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?

B

Choose BrowserTap MCP when:

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

Explore BrowserTap MCP Details

Choose Awx MCP Server when:

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

Explore Awx MCP Server Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B BrowserTap MCP Developer Tools	Awx MCP Server Developer Tools
Summary	MCP server that drives the real Chrome you already use, through an extension and CDP.	Control AWX/Ansible Tower through natural language - 49 tools for automation
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
Quality signal

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": {
    "browsertap-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "browsertap-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "awx-mcp-server": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "git"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons