Kitewright vs Browser Gateway

In-depth architectural comparison of the Kitewright and Browser Gateway 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 Kitewright 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 Kitewright Details

Choose Browser Gateway 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 Browser Gateway Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Kitewright kitewright Developer Tools	Browser Gateway Developer Tools
Summary	Lightweight browser automation for AI agents: navigate, screenshot, extract, PDF. One small binary.	AI browser tools with Chrome CDP. Navigate, screenshot, interact. Multi-provider failover.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools

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": {
    "mcp-303": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@kitewright/mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "browser-gateway": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "browser-gateway",
        "mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons