Parallel Browser MCP
An MCP server for parallel browser automation by AI agents with multiple cloud providers
Is Parallel Browser MCP safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare Parallel Browser MCP
How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: Parallel Browser MCP scores 66.6/100 (Grade B), ranked #421 of 1325 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: its packages ship with cryptographic provenance; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 2.8/10; 77% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-09-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How Parallel Browser MCP compares in MCP Servers
- #246 Yuque MCP Server 66.6 ±0
- #247 MCP Notion Server 66.6 ±0
- #248 Parallel Browser MCP 66.6 this agent
- #249 Cli Microsoft365 MCP Server 66.5 −0.1
- #250 1password MCP 66.5 −0.1
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Parallel Browser MCP’s 66.6.
Where the 66.6 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average
66.6 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceParallel Browser MCP MCP Servers average (775 agents)
Quick Trust Read
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade B reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage B is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (3 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →
Rank Trend
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
40.4 / 100Supply Chain Trust
Common questions about Parallel Browser MCP
Does Parallel Browser MCP publish package provenance?
Does Parallel Browser MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is Parallel Browser MCP actively maintained?
What license does Parallel Browser MCP use?
Are Parallel Browser MCP's commits signed?
Not a safety endorsement. HVTracker describes what public signals show, not whether a project is safe for your use case. Run your own security review before adopting in production.
AI agent surface
MCP, providers, tool surface
These runtime-trust fields — detected from public repo docs and manifests — contribute a bounded adjustment to this project's HVTrust score alongside supply-chain evidence. The exact values each field can add or subtract are documented in the methodology → Compare this surface across every listed agent in the capability matrix →
- browser
- MCP signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Detected changes to Parallel Browser MCP's runtime surface and supply-chain posture, from daily public-signal snapshots. A change here means our detectors see something different — a genuinely changed capability, or better evidence of an existing one.
Maintain Parallel Browser MCP?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores Parallel Browser MCP from public signals only — we never contact maintainers first. If a signal is wrong, stale, or missing (provenance you publish, a Scorecard you run, signed releases), tell us and we'll review it. Corrections are public and tracked on GitHub.
Reputation Timeline
Signal history
Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →
For maintainers
[](https://hvtracker.net/agents/parallel-browser-mcp)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/parallel-browser-mcp"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/parallel-browser-mcp.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in MCP Servers
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON