Nodriver — undetected… vs Stealthy Auto Browse | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Nodriver — undetected browser automation vs Stealthy Auto Browse
In-depth architectural comparison of the Nodriver — undetected browser automation and Stealthy Auto Browse 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
Nodriver — undetected browser automation
Browser Automation · Local stdio
Quality: 40/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Stealthy Auto Browse
Browser Automation · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 45/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Nodriver — undetected browser automation if you need specialized Browser Automation tools running via a local process. Choose Stealthy Auto Browse if your workspace requires Browser Automation integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Nodriver — undetected browser automation is categorized under Browser Automation and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Stealthy Auto Browse belongs to Browser Automation using remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. Select Nodriver — undetected browser automation when you need capabilities focused on browser automation and Stealthy Auto Browse when you require tools for browser automation.