Umbriel vs Playwright Mcp Server

In-depth architectural comparison of the Umbriel and Playwright 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?

U

Choose Umbriel 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).

Explore Umbriel Details

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.

Explore Playwright Mcp Server Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	U Umbriel Browser Automation	Playwright Mcp Server executeautomation Browser Automation
Summary	Playwright for the Windows desktop, from Bun — drive native GUIs via UI Automation + MCP.	An MCP server using Playwright for browser automation and webscrapping
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": {
    "umbriel": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "umbriel"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "executeautomation-playwright-mcp-server": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@michaellatman/mcp-get@latest"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons