[bel8]

I have been using Chrome's official MCP devtools server since Nov 2025.

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

Now I will add Safari to the compatibility tests. cool

[Raed667]

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

[bel8]

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]

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]

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]

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