Wield vs Browser Use: what each does and when to pick it
Browser Use is an MIT-licensed Python library for building AI agents that control a web browser. Wield is not an agent. It is a local layer of recipes that an agent calls, and it runs in your own browser with no model in the loop. Browser Use suits any site and any task. Wield suits repeated tasks on sites it has a recipe for.
Side-by-side
| Wield | Browser Use | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Local MCP server and recipe runner | Open-source Python library |
| License | MIT planned for the executor, bridge, MCP server and recipe format; source not public yet | MIT |
| Where it runs | Your own browser, through the Wield extension | A local Chrome profile, or Browser Use's cloud browsers |
| Who decides each step | A fixed recipe, with no model | The model, at each step |
| Model cost per run | $0 | Model inference billed separately |
| Sites | Sites with a recipe | Any site |
Browser Use bills model inference and hosted browsers separately. For current rates, see Browser Use pricing.
Logins and your data
Browser Use can reuse a local Chrome profile with Browser.from_system_chrome(). It can also run in its cloud with Browser(use_cloud=True) and a BROWSER_USE_API_KEY. According to its README, cloud profile sync transfers cookies but not local storage, IndexedDB or extensions.
Wield sends each request with the session your browser already has. Passwords and cookies never leave your computer. Results go from the extension to wield-mcp and then to your AI app. They never pass through wield.run. Any write, such as a booking, stops before its first write request and shows you every request. Deny is the default.
Benchmark results
These results are preliminary. As of 7 November 2026 the benchmark is still running. It covers 24 tasks on 21 sites. Each task has three fixed queries, run three times per side. Browser Use drove Claude Sonnet 5.5 with stock settings in a fresh headless Chromium. Wield ran its recipe through the extension in an everyday browser. Both sides passed the same machine check.
| Wield recipe | Browser Use + Claude Sonnet 5.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Success (equal weight per task) | 85% | 52% |
| Median time per run | 0.9 s | 78 s |
| Model cost per run | $0 | $0.18 |
| Pooled runs passing | 183 of 208 | 63 of 147 |
At the median, the recipe was about 85 times faster. That is the only speed ratio we report.
Site bot protection stopped the cloud browser in our runs on bahn.de, Lieferando, Zalando, ImmoScout24, Idealo, Eventim, mobile.de, Walmart, Zillow and OpenTable. Wield's own misses are part of the data. Its recipe passed 0 of 9 on Zalando, 0 of 2 on ImmoScout24, 5 of 9 on mobile.de and 8 of 9 on Airbnb. The per-task page for Deutsche Bahn train search shows one task in full.
When Browser Use is the better choice
- You need a site that has no Wield recipe.
- The steps are not known in advance, so a model has to decide them.
- You want to build the agent yourself in Python.
When Wield is the better choice
- You run the same task on a supported site again and again.
- You want passwords and cookies to stay on your device.
- You want no model cost per run.
- You want the tools in Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor or Codex.
FAQ
Can I use Wield and Browser Use for different jobs?
Yes. Use a recipe where one exists and a browser agent for everything else. Wield is an MCP server, so it fits into any MCP client that also runs your other tools.
Is Wield free?
The public registry, unlimited local runs and site requests are free. The executor, bridge, MCP server and recipe format are planned as open source under MIT; the source is not public yet. Paid plans for individuals and teams add the recipe builder, private recipes and admin policies. See pricing for details.
What should I use for a one-off task on a site without a recipe?
Use a browser agent such as Browser Use. You can also request a recipe for the site, which Wield's recorder can build on paid plans.
Sources
- Browser Use on GitHubgithub.com
- Browser Use pricingbrowser-use.com