Head to head
Browsentic vs Tap
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Hands your real, logged-in browser to your agent: an AI side panel extension, also over MCP.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Browser MCP for logged-in tasks. Uses your Chrome — credentials stay local. Zero-token replay.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Browsentic (85/100 against 75). Tap is hosted and callable through the gateway; Browsentic runs on your own machine.
| Browsentic | Tap | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A85/100 | B75/100 |
| Adoption | Established | Growing |
| GitHub stars | 26 | 18 |
| Downloads / week | 550 | 106 |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | 1 | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-25 | 2026-08-09 |
| Category | Scraping and browsing | Scraping and browsing |