Does browser-control run?

Yes. browser-control runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 9 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.

How did Argusic test browser-control?

On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit b352a1ac0171. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.

What did it cost to test browser-control?

The run that produced this verdict cost $0.06: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.

How long does browser-control take to install?

9 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.

Does browser-control need a GPU?

Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.

What goes wrong when installing browser-control?

4 things broke in the recorded run, and 4 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.

Where is the evidence for browser-control?

The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.

browser-control

A tiny, fast Rust CLI that drives a real browser over the Chrome DevTools Protocol, built for coding agents.

Runssource: GitHubRustMITcommit b352a1ac0171

Rust, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: agent, browser automation, llm and rust.

browser-control runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 9 minutes and hit 4 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

The browser-control CLI builds and passes all 10 unit tests; the binary connects to Chromium 127 over CDP and successfully executes open, snapshot, eval, cdp, text, and inspect commands against real web pages.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured

Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).

At a glance

verdict: Runs
Argusic Score: 100 / 100
cost of the verifying run: $0.06 (measured)
recorded runs: 1
last tested: 2026-10-01
stars: 3,147
forks: 209
open issues: 1
watchers: 78
size: 5 MB
created: 2016-12-21
last push: 2026-08-27

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed 2026-10-01. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.

What was measured

From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.

Time lost to each failure while testing browser-control, drawn from the recorded run — Every bar is a failure the agent recorded, with the time it cost. Drawn from this run, not from anywhere else.

What went wrong, in the agent's own words

The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.

No Rust toolchain (rustup/cargo/rustc) installed in container3 minutes
No Chrome/Chromium browser available on system3 minutes
Chrome crashes without --no-sandbox flag in this container environment (no FUSE/kernel sandbox support)1 minute
cargo fmt --check flagged formatting issues in src/cloud.rs0.5 minutes

Install time: 9 minutes
Cold machine to finish: 10 minutes
Errors hit and fixed: 4 hit, 4 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved: cargo test --locked: 10/10 passed; cargo build --locked succeeded (debug + release); end-to-end: started Chromium with --no-sandbox --disable-gpu, ran browser-control doctor (CDP endpoint + browser OK), open https://example.com -> ok, snapshot returned @e1 link 'Learn more', eval 'document.title' returned 'Example Domain', cdp Browser.getVersion returned product 'HeadlessChrome/127.0.6533.17', text returned full page text, inspect returned title/url/readyState/elements
Model tokens used: 66,615
Exact commit tested: b352a1ac0171
Container image: sha256:cdd920bce783

What was not measured

The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.

Peak GPU memory: this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
Behaviour over a long run: each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load

The end of the recording

The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.

         };
         eprintln!("export BROWSER_CONTROL_CDP_WS={ws}");
     }
 M src/cloud.rs
exec
/bin/sh -lc 'date -d "now" +%s 2>/dev/null || date +%s' in /work/repo
 succeeded in 0ms:
1790882765
All verified. Here's the final report:
tokens used
66,615
All verified. Here's the final report:

Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.

How it was tested

One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.

Strengths and limits

Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.

What went well

Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
Recovered from all 4 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.

What did not, or is not known

Took 9 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 62 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.

Of the 63 agent projects Argusic has installed and timed, browser-control was the 35th fastest to reach a running state, and 43 of 63 reached one at all.

What it is a reasonable choice for

Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
A quick evaluation: it was running 9 minutes after the clone.

Also tested, in the same area

Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.

Run history

tested by	attempt	outcome	score	cost USD	when
Argusic Runner	1/3	Runs	100.00	0.06	2026-10-01 19:26 UTC

Topics (from GitHub)

agent browser-automation llm rust

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/browser-control.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/browser-control)

Questions

Does browser-control run?: Yes. browser-control runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 9 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test browser-control?: On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit b352a1ac0171. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test browser-control?: The run that produced this verdict cost $0.06: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does browser-control take to install?: 9 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
Does browser-control need a GPU?: Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing browser-control?: 4 things broke in the recorded run, and 4 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
How does browser-control compare with the alternatives?: Of the 63 agent projects Argusic has installed and timed, browser-control was the 35th fastest to reach a running state, and 43 of 63 reached one at all.
Where is the evidence for browser-control?: The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.