Playwright MCP Server vs Playwright Plus Pytho… | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Playwright MCP Server vs Playwright Plus Python MCP
In-depth architectural comparison of the Playwright MCP Server and Playwright Plus Python MCP 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Playwright MCP Server
Browser Automation · Local stdio
Quality: 44/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Playwright Plus Python MCP
Browser Automation · Local stdio
Quality: 49/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Playwright MCP Server if you need specialized Browser Automation tools running via a local process. Choose Playwright Plus Python MCP if your workspace requires Browser Automation integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Playwright MCP Server 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: Supports Chromium, Firefox, and WebKit browsers, Automatic browser binary installation on demand, Emulates 143 real devices with viewport, user-agent, and touch support.
Playwright MCP Server is categorized under Browser Automation and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Playwright Plus Python MCP belongs to Browser Automation using local stdio subprocess. Select Playwright MCP Server when you need capabilities focused on browser automation and Playwright Plus Python MCP when you require tools for browser automation.
