MCP Accessibility Scanner vs Powershell MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the MCP Accessibility Scanner and Powershell 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.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose MCP Accessibility 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).
• Primary tools included: scan_page, audit_site, scan_page_matrix.

Explore MCP Accessibility Scanner Details

Choose Powershell 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: run_powershell, run_program, list_services.

Explore Powershell MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	MCP Accessibility Scanner Browser Automation	Powershell MCP Browser Automation
Summary	MCP server for automated web accessibility scanning with Playwright and Axe-core.	Headless Windows ops over MCP: hidden PowerShell + in-process SSH, WinRM & SFTP.
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": {
    "mcp-accessibility-scanner": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mcp-accessibility-scanner"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "powershell-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@imrrd/powershell-mcp@latest"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons