←back to thread

Claude in Chrome

(claude.com)
278 points ianrahman | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
1. xnx ◴[] No.46340755[source]
Good to see. Google only has this feature in experimental mode for $125/month subscribers: https://labs.google.com/mariner/landing

Google allows AI browser automation through Gemini CLI as well, but it's not interactive and doesn't have ready access to the main browser profile.

replies(2): >>46340844 #>>46341005 #
2. CPLX ◴[] No.46340844[source]
Chrome's DevTools MCP has been excellent in my experience for web development and testing. Claude code can jump in there and just pretend to be a user and do just about everything, including reading console output.

I'm not using it for the use case of actually interacting with other people's websites, but for this purpose, it's been fantastic.

replies(1): >>46341460 #
3. londons_explore ◴[] No.46341005[source]
It's part of antigravity for free. Just make a blank workspace and ask it to use a browser to do X and it'll start chrome and start navigating, clicking, scrolling, etc.
replies(1): >>46341058 #
4. qingcharles ◴[] No.46341058[source]
Yeah, I only found it by accident when I asked it to make a change against my web app and it modified the code then popped open Chrome and started trying different common user/pass combinations to log into the app so it could validate the changes.
replies(1): >>46345529 #
5. crashabr ◴[] No.46341460[source]
I've been wondering if it was a good replacement for the playwright mcp, at least for chrome-only testing.
replies(2): >>46341564 #>>46342591 #
6. gedy ◴[] No.46341564{3}[source]
After a lot of trouble trying to get playwright mcp to work on Linux, I'm curious if this works better
7. s900mhz ◴[] No.46342591{3}[source]
I personally replaced my playwright mcp with this. Seems to use less context and generally more reliable.
8. grugagag ◴[] No.46345529{3}[source]
Wait, It was brute forcing passwords? This sounds extremely dangerous in the wrong hands. Seems like a boon for malicious users
replies(1): >>46346661 #
9. qingcharles ◴[] No.46346661{4}[source]
Yeah, I didn't see what passwords it typed but it was trying usernames like "testuser" and stuff :p