The best agent-browser alternative

agent-browser gives an agent a command surface for a disposable session. ego(lite) gives it a browser workspace. ego(lite) completed 93.5% of tasks perfectly in our published benchmark of 31 live-site browser automation jobs, the highest perfect-completion rate measured.

ego(lite) vs agent-browser

Feature comparison between ego(lite) and agent-browser.
Featureego(lite)agent-browser
Default browser stateYour imported Chrome profile: logins, cookies, extensionsFresh headless profile; reusing real Chrome needs a --profile snapshot copy or a manual CDP connection
How the agent acts on a pageBatches multiple actions in a few lines of JavaScript per turnOne command per action; batch mode can queue steps but can't branch on a snapshot mid-run
How the agent reads a pageCompressed Snapshot: accessibility tree with stable @N refsSimilar: compact accessibility snapshot with @e refs
Browser automation on live sites (31 tasks, same model)93.5% perfect, $1.75 per completed task, 6m 38s average62.9% perfect, $4.23 per completed task, 10m 05s average
Watch or take over a taskYes. Headful windows by default; click in and finish it yourselfHeadless by default; watching requires the separate --headed flag
Parallel tasksSpaces run tasks side by side, never touching your tabsMultiple isolated sessions via --session flags, managed and monitored from the CLI
Reusable skills (coming soon)Distills successful runs into reusable skills for repeat tasks (limited beta)No built-in equivalent
SetupInstall the app, run /ego-browser in your agentnpm, Homebrew, or Cargo install, then agent-browser install to download a Chrome for Testing build
PriceFree, no subscription; ego-browser shell is MIT-licensedFree, open source

Last updated Aug 30, 2026

Trusted by developers from

  • Vercel
  • OpenAI
  • Anthropic
  • SpaceX
  • Google
  • Microsoft
  • DJI
  • DeepSeek
  • Kimi
  • TikTok
  • MiniMax
  • SAP
  • ZARA
  • eBay
  • Cisco
  • Trip.com
  • LINE
  • NHN
  • Hyundai Motor

Browser automation benchmark: ego(lite) vs agent-browser

This benchmark tests agent browsing on the live web instead of a sandbox: 31 multi-step jobs on real sites, many behind login walls. ego(lite) and agent-browser ran the identical set.

agent: pi · model: ChatGPT 5.6 Sol · thinking: max · 31 tasks

  1. ego(lite)93.5%
  2. agent-browser62.9%

Task completion rate

Every tool got the same 31 tasks: multi-step jobs on live websites, many behind login walls. A task counts only when every requirement is met. No partial credit. Tasks like: pull a week of post analytics from a logged-in X account, lock in a nonstop fare for next Friday, keep a 2048 board alive all the way to the 256 tile.

agent: pi · model: ChatGPT 5.6 Sol · thinking: max · 31 tasks

  1. ego(lite)
    93.5%
  2. agent-browser
    62.9%

Cost per completed task

Failed runs still bill you. This divides total model spend by tasks actually completed, so it prices what a result really costs. Lower is better.

agent: pi · model: ChatGPT 5.6 Sol · thinking: max · 31 tasks

  1. ego(lite)
    $1.75
  2. agent-browser
    $4.23

Efficiency score

Rubric points earned per thousand model turns: how much finished work each model call buys. Higher is better.

agent: pi · model: ChatGPT 5.6 Sol · thinking: max · 31 tasks

  1. ego(lite)
    6.16
  2. agent-browser
    4.04

Average task time

Average wall-clock time per task across all 31. ego(lite) finished tasks 52% faster than agent-browser.

agent: pi · model: ChatGPT 5.6 Sol · thinking: max · 31 tasks

  1. ego(lite)
    6m 38s
  2. agent-browser
    10m 05s

Real-World Bench is an open-source benchmark: 31 complex real-world browser automation tasks on live websites, every tool driven by the same pi agent with the same model (gpt-5.6-sol, thinking effort max) and graded by the same judge against per-task rubrics. Every score covers all 31 tasks, with no per-task cherry-picking.

Why ego(lite) is better than agent-browser

The distinction is not what the agent can click, but what it can work with. ego(lite) keeps a full local Chromium session, your authorized state, and separate Spaces in view, so the same agent can search, research, extract, fill, test, or handle a longer web task without reducing the browser to one command at a time.

93.5% of tasks done perfectly. No other tool tops 78%

agent-browser's core loop is open, snapshot, click @e2, snapshot again: each step a command the model reads before deciding the next one, and every extra round trip is another chance to lose the thread. On those 31 jobs, more than one agent-browser task in three ends short of a perfect score.ego(lite) reaches the page as a compressed Snapshot with stable @N refs, and the agent acts on several of them in one JavaScript turn. Fewer round trips leave fewer places to stall: 93.5% of the same 31 tasks end perfect, 52% faster than agent-browser on average task time.

Time to finish a task, shorter is better

  1. ego(lite)
    398 s
  2. agent browser
    605 s

Data source - Task: finish an average live-site job

Parallel multitasking, execute faster

agent-browser's parallelism is a set of --session flags you manage yourself, headless by default, so a hung dialog leaves you guessing from CLI output alone. The --headed flag meant to fix that has open bug reports of being ignored, or of Chrome crash-looping instead of showing a window.In ego(lite) there's no cap on Spaces: each runs its own task at once, headful by default, on its own imported Chrome profile. None of them steal your tab, and you can watch or take over anytime.

No more back and forth Cost fewer tokens

A typical agent-browser flow is open, snapshot, click @e2, fill @e3, snapshot again: separate commands, each a round trip the model reads before deciding the next step. Its batch mode can queue steps, but the model can't act on a snapshot until the whole batch returns.ego(lite)'s agent writes a few lines of JavaScript that run several steps in one turn, reading the result as a compressed Snapshot. Stacked together, that keeps a whole task well below a command-per-action loop.

Claude Code · ego(lite)
>/ego-browser Add the first product to the cart, then check checkout loads
●Bash(
ego-browser nodejs <<'EOF' await openOrReuseTab('localhost:3000') await click('.product-card') await click('.add-to-cart') await click('a[href="/checkout"]') cliLog('checkout loaded') EOF
)
⎿Output:
[t=4480ms] checkout loaded
Done. Both steps work.
─── 1 tool call · ↑ 1.1k tokens ───
Claude Code · agent-browser
>Add the first product to the cart, then check checkout loads
$agent-browser open localhost:3000
⎿stdout
Navigated to http://localhost:3000
↑ 1.6k tokens sent so far
Storefront loaded. Need a snapshot to find the first product.
$agent-browser snapshot -i
⎿Snapshot
… +224 lines (ctrl+o to expand)
↑ 3.1k tokens sent so far
Found the first product card at @e18. Clicking it.
$agent-browser click @e18
⎿stdout
Clicked @e18
↑ 4.9k tokens sent so far
Product page loaded, but refs are stale now. Snapshotting again.
$agent-browser snapshot -i
⎿Snapshot
… +205 lines (ctrl+o to expand)
↑ 6.8k tokens sent so far
Add to cart button is @e7.
$agent-browser click @e7
⎿stdout
Clicked @e7
↑ 9.2k tokens sent so far
Added. Heading to checkout.
$agent-browser click @e24
⎿stdout
Clicked @e24
↑ 11.2k tokens sent so far
Confirming the checkout page actually loaded.
$agent-browser wait --url "**/checkout"
⎿stdout
Matched http://localhost:3000/checkout
↑ 13.6k tokens sent so far
─── 7 tool calls · ↑ 13.6k tokens ───

The same task, the same model. Left: one batched JavaScript call in ego(lite), 1.1k tokens total. Right: agent-browser's CLI, one command per action, 7 round trips, tokens climb to 13.6k.

Same Chrome, agent-native

Getting agent-browser onto your real Chrome takes setup: a profile name copies your profile into a read-only snapshot, or a persistent path is supposed to carry logins across restarts, though there's an open report of it staying empty on Linux. The alternative, a remote-debugging port, exposes full browser control to any local process on it. Skip the setup and you get a fresh headless profile that stalls at every captcha and 2FA prompt.ego(lite) imports your Chrome profile in one click, live.

Make it a seamless transition

If agent-browser convinced you that coding agents should drive a browser directly, ego(lite) is the same conviction with your real browser attached. Switching is minutes, and nothing has to be uninstalled.

1

Download ego(lite)

Download ego(lite) and import your Chrome profile in one click. Logins, cookies, and extensions come with it, with no --profile flag or profile-directory copy required.

2

Run your first task with /ego-browser

Paste one sentence into Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, or Gemini CLI and hit enter. No daemon to start, no CDP port to open, no session flag to manage.

Paste into your agent

/ego-browser Open ego.app and check that the pricing page loads

3

Watch it work

The task runs in its own Space, so your tabs stay untouched. The browser window is real: watch live or take over anytime. Results land back in your agent's CLI.

ego(lite) Spaces overview with four browser tasks running side by side and visible at once, unlike agent-browser's headless --session instances: Claude Code tracking Apple stock on Yahoo Finance, Codex filtering cars by year on cars.com, Hermes finishing a SaaS back-office task, a user scraping X, and a hand tapping + to open another Space

Keep agent-browser for headless CI checks if it's already wired into a pipeline there. ego(lite) covers browser work on your own machine, with your accounts, visible Spaces, and a full Chromium surface.

When to use each tool

Choose ego(lite) when

  • Your tasks touch real accounts: Gmail, dashboards, anything behind SSO, and your imported profile is already signed in, live, with no profile-copy step or manually opened CDP port.
  • You want per-task token savings from Snapshot input plus multi-action JavaScript batches, stacked, instead of one CLI command round trip per action.
  • You want to watch tasks run headfully in parallel Spaces by default, and take over the moment one needs a human, with no separate flag or platform-specific display setup.
  • You want the browser you already live in to be the agent browser: no daemon to manage, no session flags, no CDP connection to wire up.

Choose agent-browser when

  • You're running in headless CI environments or serverless functions where a desktop browser isn't available and disposable sessions are the point.
  • You're building on Vercel Sandbox or already deep in the Vercel ecosystem and want a tool designed alongside it.
  • You want a minimal footprint on servers: a Rust CLI and daemon with no Playwright or Node.js runtime dependency, installable via npm, Homebrew, or Cargo.
  • You need iOS Safari coverage through WebDriver, which ego(lite), Chromium only, doesn't cover.

Compare ego(lite) with other browser automation tools

Side-by-side comparisons with Puppeteer, Playwright MCP, Claude Chrome extension, Browser Harness, and 7 more.

FAQ

What is agent-browser?

agent-browser, also known as Vercel agent-browser since Vercel Labs built it, is an open-source browser automation CLI built for AI coding agents: a Rust CLI in front of a pure Rust daemon that drives Chrome directly over the DevTools protocol, with no Playwright or Node.js runtime required to run it. Its snapshot command returns a compact accessibility tree with @e refs, so agents click and fill against stable references instead of brittle selectors, and it ships as a skill for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, and most other coding agents, with an MCP server available as an optional subcommand rather than the default path. It's free, well-designed, and widely adopted.

Is ego(lite) a good agent-browser alternative?

Yes, if the tasks you care about involve your real accounts or benefit from being visible. Both give a coding agent a browser through a CLI or skill rather than an MCP-first setup; ego(lite) adds your imported Chrome profile live by default, headful windows you can take over, parallel Spaces, and multi-action JavaScript execution. agent-browser remains a clean choice for disposable headless automation in scripts and CI.

How was the ego(lite) vs agent-browser benchmark run?

Both tools ran the same 31 complex real-world browser automation tasks on live websites, driven by the same pi agent with the same model (gpt-5.6-sol, thinking effort max) and graded by the same judge against per-task rubrics. Every score covers all 31 tasks, so a bad task still counts against it. ego(lite) finished 93.5% of tasks perfectly at $1.75 per completed task, averaging 6 minutes 38 seconds per task, 52% faster than agent-browser; agent-browser finished 62.9% at $4.23, averaging 10 minutes 5 seconds. The harness, the tasks, the rubrics, and the raw results are open source in the ego-browser-benchmark-framework repository on GitHub, so every number can be audited or reproduced.

Can agent-browser use my Chrome logins?

Yes, with extra setup, and it isn't fully reliable yet. Pass a profile name and agent-browser copies that Chrome profile into a temp directory as a read-only snapshot, so it launches with your existing logins but nothing written during the session copies back to your real profile; on Windows you also have to close Chrome first, since profile files can be locked. There's also a persistent-profile mode meant to carry cookies and login state across restarts on its own, but it has an open bug report of the profile directory staying empty between runs. Connecting to a running Chrome over CDP works too, but the project's own docs flag that port as exposing full browser control to any local process. In ego(lite) the logged-in browser is the default: import your profile once and every agent task starts from it, live, with no extra flags.

Why is ego(lite) cheaper per task if both use accessibility snapshots?

The snapshot is only half of it. agent-browser's batch mode can fire a fixed list of commands in one process launch, but the model still can't act on what a snapshot returns until the whole batch finishes, so a task where each step depends on the last ends up as a long chain of command-then-model-reads-the-result cycles. ego(lite) lets the agent batch several actions in one JavaScript execution and reason about the result immediately, reading it as a compressed Snapshot. The savings come from the two stacked together, and they show up per task: across those 31 jobs, that works out to $1.75 per completed task for ego(lite) against $4.23 for agent-browser.

Do I need an MCP server for either tool?

No. That's a philosophy both tools share. agent-browser's primary interface is its CLI, with an MCP server available as an optional subcommand for clients that want one. ego(lite) connects through the ego-browser shell by running /ego-browser inside your agent. Neither requires editing MCP config files as the default path.

Can I keep using agent-browser alongside ego(lite)?

Yes. They don't conflict. Some developers keep agent-browser for headless checks in CI or on Vercel Sandbox, and use ego(lite) for everything interactive: logged-in tasks, parallel research, anything worth watching. In practice the logged-in tasks are most of them.

Is ego(lite) free like agent-browser?

Yes. ego(lite) is free with no subscription, and the ego-browser shell your agent connects through is MIT-licensed open source.

Can an agent read logged-in tabs without sending screenshots every step?

Yes. ego(lite) exposes a compact DOM/accessibility Snapshot for routine reads and lets the agent request a screenshot only when visual evidence is useful. That keeps token and latency overhead lower than screenshot-first loops while preserving the real page state and your authorized session.

How do persistent browser sessions differ between the two tools?

ego(lite) keeps the imported Chrome context available across tasks and isolates each run in its own Space. agent-browser can copy a profile or use a persistent path, but the copy is read-only by default and community reports describe persistence and CDP attachment as setup-sensitive. Verify the account, URL, and fixture after every reconnect instead of assuming cookies survived.

Can I use either tool for real workflow automation such as finance or research?

Yes, for authorized, reviewable work. Use a test account or safe environment for actions that can charge, send, delete, or change records; preserve source URLs and output fields for scraping or competitor research; and keep publishing, payments, and other irreversible steps human-approved. agent-browser is convenient for disposable headless jobs, while ego(lite) is designed for visible logged-in workflows and parallel Spaces.

Which option is better for local or self-hosted deployment?

agent-browser's Rust CLI and daemon are a compact fit for headless servers and Vercel-style sandboxes. ego(lite) runs locally on macOS or Windows, with the browser and session data on your machine, which is useful when a local model or privacy policy keeps data off hosted infrastructure. Check your OS, display/headless requirements, browser support, and provider data policy before choosing.

Give your agent a real browser

Free, runs on your computer, imports your Chrome profile in one click. Works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and any CLI agent that writes code.