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 fieldPlaywright MCPMCP100 SelectedFirecrawl MCPMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for
  • Inspecting and testing web interfaces through accessibility snapshots
  • Reproducing browser journeys in a dedicated test profile
  • Scraping and extracting public web pages
  • Search, crawl, map, batch, and research workflows
  • Teams already using Firecrawl API limits and governance
Not ideal for
  • API-only testing that does not need a browser
  • Unattended access to a personal browsing profile
  • Simple known-page fetches that do not justify a paid API
  • Sites whose terms or access controls prohibit automated collection
  • Workflows requiring guaranteed freshness or extraction accuracy
Avoid when
  • 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
  • You cannot govern which URLs the agent may access
  • The workflow may collect personal, confidential, copyrighted, or access-controlled content without review
  • Unexpected API-credit consumption is unacceptable
Provenance
Provenance details

First-party MCP

Microsoft · Publisher source ↗

First-party MCP

Firecrawl · Publisher source ↗

Maintenance
Maintenance details

Repo: Aug 12, 2026

Package: Jul 9, 2026

Repo: Aug 12, 2026

Package: Aug 12, 2026

Popularity evidence
GitHub stars

36,125

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

7,234

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

30-day package downloads

6,369,865

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

412,488

30-day package downloads · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

External adoption evidence
  • npm: package downloads: 6,369,865Exact attributable signal.npm: package downloads · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-07-29T17:30:00.000ZEvidence source ↗
  • github: repository stars: 36,125Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
  • github: repository stars: 7,234Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
Client coverage
Client coverage details
Claude CodeLocal stdio
Claude DesktopLocal stdio
CodexLocal stdio
VS CodeLocal stdio
CursorLocal stdio
OpenCodeLocal stdio
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
AuthenticationThe 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.Cloud and local-package configurations use FIRECRAWL_API_KEY. Official docs also show hosted MCP URLs containing the key; environment-variable or protected input handling is safer than embedding the key in a URL.
CostThe first-party open-source package lists no MCP server usage fee. Normal internet, hosted-client, proxy, or third-party website costs can still apply.MCP calls consume the account's standard Firecrawl API credits and rate limits. Search, crawl, batch, and agent operations can consume more resources than single-page scraping; current plan pricing applies.
PermissionsThe exposed tools can navigate pages, interact with elements, enter text, upload files, inspect network activity, and optionally use additional browser capabilities.The MCP can initiate outbound requests to user- or model-selected URLs and invoke Firecrawl scrape, search, crawl, map, extraction, batch, and research capabilities according to enabled tools and account limits.
Data handlingPage 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.URLs, queries, extraction schemas, and retrieved page content are processed by the configured Firecrawl service. Cloud mode sends them to Firecrawl; self-hosted mode follows the operator's deployment and any configured model/provider dependencies.
Limitations
Tradeoffs
  • 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.
  • Broad scrape, crawl, search, and autonomous-agent tools are powerful but enlarge prompt-injection, compliance, and cost exposure.
  • Cloud mode is easy to configure; self-hosting adds operational burden.
  • Remote URL forms that embed an API key are convenient but can leak through configuration, logs, screenshots, or history.
Risk contextPlaywright 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.Main risks are prompt injection from untrusted pages, collection-policy violations, sensitive URL/query disclosure, API-key leakage, and agent-driven credit spend. Use URL allow-lists, low limits, human approval, and a dedicated low-budget key.
Evidence date
Editorial review2026-07-242026-07-24
Candidate evidence2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

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

Read the evidence method →
Compare MCPs | MCP100 Index