Browser Automation MCP Server

GhostQA

Name: GhostQA
Author: SyncTek-LLC

AI personas navigate your web app in real browsers, find bugs and UX issues. No scripts needed.

Scan found nothing by SyncTek-LLC0MITPythonIntermediatestdio

Install

Claude Code

claude mcp add ghostqa -- uvx ghostqa

Cursor

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ghostqa": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "ghostqa"
      ]
    }
  }
}

VS Code

{
  "mcp": {
    "servers": {
      "ghostqa": {
        "command": "uvx",
        "args": [
          "ghostqa"
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}

Windsurf

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ghostqa": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "ghostqa"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Claude Desktop

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ghostqa": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "ghostqa"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Safety Report

57% Scan found nothing

Scanned 5 months ago

4 passed 3 warnings

Security

Authentication

details

Authentication detected: bearer_check, auth_header

Pass

CORS Policy

details

stdio transport — CORS not applicable

N/A

Rate Limiting

details

Rate limiting detected: rate_limit_middleware

Pass

Known CVEs

details

2 deps with known issues (medium)

Warning

Code Quality

Dependency Audit

details

2 deps with known issues (medium)

Warning

Dangerous Patterns

details

No dangerous code patterns detected

Pass

License

details

License: MIT

Pass

Community

Maintenance Status

details

Last commit 5 months ago

Warning

Learn about our security methodology →

Compatibility

Claude CodeFull support

Tested

CursorFull support

Tested

VS CodeFull support via Copilot

Tested

WindsurfFull support

Tested

Claude DesktopFull support

Tested

Frequently Asked Questions

What is GhostQA?

AI personas navigate your web app in real browsers, find bugs and UX issues. No scripts needed.

Is GhostQA safe to use?

We cannot tell you that, and nobody scanning at this scale can. What we did in March 2026 was shallow-clone GhostQA and run five keyword searches over its source: auth identifiers, CORS configuration, rate-limit identifiers, the dependency manifest against a hardcoded list of 18 known-vulnerable packages, and unguarded eval/exec calls. None of them matched. A text search cannot follow a variable, judge intent, or tell you what a server does once it is running, so "nothing matched" is not "safe". What the scan does and does not cover is written out at /mcp/security.

What are alternatives to GhostQA?

Similar MCP servers include Scrapling MCP Server, Chrome DevTools MCP, Playwright MCP. Each serves a similar purpose but may differ in features, language, and compatibility.