Field-by-field comparison

Compare the evidence before choosing an MCP.

Each signal stays separate, missing facts remain visible, and the column order follows your selection.

MCPs in this comparison

Uncheck an MCP to remove it. Comparing two or three keeps each signal in its own row.

Open canonical comparison link

Comparable alternatives

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence fieldDataForSEOWatchlist candidatePlaywright MCPMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for
  • SEO/data teams that need DataForSEO SERP, keyword, backlink, on-page, business and related datasets in MCP clients.
  • Inspecting and testing web interfaces through accessibility snapshots
  • Reproducing browser journeys in a dedicated test profile
Not ideal for
  • Users without DataForSEO API credentials/budget or who need a narrow single-dataset server.
  • API-only testing that does not need a browser
  • Unattended access to a personal browsing profile
Avoid when
  • Do not use old/deprecated v2 setup instructions or expose DataForSEO account credentials in client configs beyond what the selected transport requires.
  • The workflow cannot permit an agent to navigate, type, click, upload files, or read page content
  • You cannot isolate sensitive authenticated sessions from the agent-controlled browser
Provenance
Provenance details

First-party MCP

github:dataforseo · Publisher source ↗

First-party MCP

Microsoft · Publisher source ↗

Maintenance
Maintenance details

Stale

Repo: Not documented

Package: Not documented

Repo: Aug 12, 2026

Package: Jul 9, 2026

Popularity evidence
GitHub starsNot documented

36,125

GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

Package downloads / 30 daysNo reliable download data

6,369,865

package downloads / 30 days · checked 2026-07-29T17:30:00.000Z

Client coverage
Client coverage detailsNot documented
Claude CodeLocal stdio
Claude DesktopLocal stdio
CodexLocal stdio
VS CodeLocal stdio
CursorLocal stdio
OpenCodeLocal stdio
Client coverage noteLocal stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
AuthenticationStdio supports DataForSEO login/password; HTTP supports OAuth 2.0 with documented Basic fallback.The server itself does not require a service account for local stdio use, but websites opened in the controlled browser may use cookies or other authenticated browser state.
CostDataForSEO API usage is billable under publisher pricing; exact request costs/credits vary by API and plan.The first-party open-source package lists no MCP server usage fee. Normal internet, hosted-client, proxy, or third-party website costs can still apply.
PermissionsData-access scope follows the DataForSEO account/transport credentials and enabled APIs.The exposed tools can navigate pages, interact with elements, enter text, upload files, inspect network activity, and optionally use additional browser capabilities.
Data handlingQueries and returned SEO/web/business data flow through DataForSEO and the connected AI client/provider.Page text, accessibility snapshots, console output, network details, uploaded paths, and browser state may be returned to the connected MCP client. Isolated mode keeps the temporary profile in memory; persistent mode stores browser state on disk.
Limitations
Tradeoffs
  • Promoted after strict re-audit: canonical identity and MCP-native/publisher-backed implementation are sufficiently evidenced, with real workflow value, usable documentation, understandable permissions, plausible maintenance, and no unresolved security veto. Still not strong enough for Selected.
  • A persistent profile is convenient but can retain cookies and authenticated state between sessions.
  • Origin allow/block options reduce accidental access but the publisher explicitly says they are not a security boundary.
Risk contextCredential exposure and potentially high API spend from a broad tool/API surface are the main operational risks.Playwright MCP is not a security boundary. Prefer an isolated browser profile, non-sensitive test accounts, narrow destinations, minimal optional permissions, and client-side approval controls.
Evidence date
Editorial review2026-09-13T00:00:00Z2026-07-24
Candidate evidence2026-09-13T00:00:00Z2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

Popularity, maintenance, fit, permissions, and client support are independent evidence fields.

Read the evidence method →