4 ms·

I have been using Chrome's official MCP devtools server since Nov 2025. https://github.com/ChromeDevTools/chrome-devtools-mcp https://github.com/ChromeDevTools

by bel8 3mo ago

I have been using Chrome's official MCP devtools server since Nov 2025. https://github.com/ChromeDevTools/chrome-devtools-mcp https://github.com/ChromeDevTools/chrome-devtools-mcp Before that I used Chrome web drivers but MCP is faster and more capable. I also instruct LLMs to test my pages on Firefox using its official MCP to make sure they work in Firefox too: https://github.com/mozilla/firefox-devtools-mcp https://github.com/mozilla/firefox-devtools-mcp Now I will add Safari to the compatibility tests. cool

Raed667 3mo ago
Is there a difference between using these and using the playwright mcp with Chrome/Firefox config?
- bel8 3mo ago
  I can speak for Chrome's MCP which I have more experience. devtools MCP will have access to more deep level fetures such as performance profiling, lighthouse and network requests in details (headers, auth, cookies...). For example, I had success using chrome devtools mcp to debug frontend performance issues. The LLM captured and analyzed some nice traces and was able to isolate bottlenecks and unnecessary repaints and reflows.
  - elAhmo 3mo ago
    Network request access is really helpful! When having access to both backend and frontend, and then seeing what actual code is requesting and returning can really help with hunting bugs or doing basic QA.
- Syntaf 3mo ago
  I used the chrome MCP to profile a slow react page at my company, set a /goal and had it iterate until it achieved under 100ms responsiveness to actions. Claude was able to identify the slowness and use various react tricks to fix the specific issues, all without my input. I don’t think the playwright MCP can do this, unless I’m mistaken
a_c 3mo ago
Sometimes I find myself wanting the other way round, instead of letting LLM tell browser what to do, I want what I did manually in the browser be visible to LLM. I made a MCP to cover that use case

by bel8 3mo ago

Raed667 3mo ago

Is there a difference between using these and using the playwright mcp with Chrome/Firefox config?

bel8 3mo ago
I can speak for Chrome's MCP which I have more experience. devtools MCP will have access to more deep level fetures such as performance profiling, lighthouse and network requests in details (headers, auth, cookies...). For example, I had success using chrome devtools mcp to debug frontend performance issues. The LLM captured and analyzed some nice traces and was able to isolate bottlenecks and unnecessary repaints and reflows.
- elAhmo 3mo ago
  Network request access is really helpful! When having access to both backend and frontend, and then seeing what actual code is requesting and returning can really help with hunting bugs or doing basic QA.
Syntaf 3mo ago
I used the chrome MCP to profile a slow react page at my company, set a /goal and had it iterate until it achieved under 100ms responsiveness to actions. Claude was able to identify the slowness and use various react tricks to fix the specific issues, all without my input. I don’t think the playwright MCP can do this, unless I’m mistaken

a_c 3mo ago

Sometimes I find myself wanting the other way round, instead of letting LLM tell browser what to do, I want what I did manually in the browser be visible to LLM. I made a MCP to cover that use case