Loading the registry…
Model Context Protocol server for Browserless.io browser automation
We found this by crawling public sources and nobody has attested to it. That is how most of the registry gets here, and it is not a mark against the artifact — it only means no authenticated act of publication is on record. An artifact can be the vendor's own and still appear here.
Choose your runtime: the CLI writes the mcpServers config entry for that target.
nerlo install --target claude-code -- browserless-mcp
Install respects the composite badge: Clean proceeds, Caution prompts for confirmation, and Flagged is refused. Write operations require an API token.
5 of 11 scanners examined this package. The rest do not apply to it — language, ecosystem and packaging decide which analyzers can say anything, and a scanner that cannot examine an artifact reports nothing rather than passing it.
v1.4.0
0 findings · 0.6s
v2.0.11
31 findings · 8.3s
v0.3.74
6 findings · 1.9s
v0.1.0
14 findings · 3.7s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 3.7s
vv0.3.2
No Go packages were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
v0.1.0
This scanner found nothing in this artifact that it assesses. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 2.0s
No report in this scan: govulncheck, osv-scanner, trivy, trivy_image.
1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.
| Completed | Composite | Change | Scanners | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2026 | Scan Halted | — | agentshield: completecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source ·n/a: not applicable | rejected |
Findings in files this artifact installs stand as reported; a model re-read the rest and said which ones it believes are false positives. This is a second opinion published beside the evidence, not a correction to it: the per-scanner reports above are unchanged, every dismissed finding is still listed there at its original severity, and the score and the Flagged badge are computed from those raw severities alone. Nothing below moved them.
Out of 51 findings across every scanner that examined this package.
Not reviewed is not the same as clean. Those 45 findings stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity, as they would have without this review.
The model could have called any of these a false positive and did not.
2 AAK-ANTHROPIC-SDK-001
Files: src/simple-server.ts, src/index.ts · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 AAK-DNS-REBIND-002
Files: package.json · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 AAK-OAUTH-3P-001
Files: package.json · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 AAK-SUPPLY-005
Files: package-lock.json · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 LOW_ANALYZABILITY
Files: /repo · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
45 The model called these false positives and our own check did not agree, so the dismissal was refused.
Rules: UNANALYZABLE_BINARY, AAK-SEC-MD-001, opt.nerlo-rules.nerlo-hardcoded-external-egress and 4 more · Files: /repo/sample-document.pdf, /repo/test-document.pdf, SECURITY.md and 9 more · reported by cisco-skill-scanner, agent-audit-kit, nerlo-behavioral
Critical findings in client code and high-severity issues identified.
The artifact contains critical findings in `/repo/dist/client.js` and `/repo/src/client.ts`, indicating potential sensitive data exposure or insecure operations. High-severity findings include a DNS rebinding vulnerability in `package.json` and Anthropic SDK usage in `src/index.ts` and `src/simple-server.ts`. These findings warrant immediate attention due to the capabilities they expose.
Concern level assessed by the review: Critical. This is the review's scale, not the registry badge.
Reviewed by gemini-2.5-flash. The model sees the findings, not your code, and cannot change a score.