Cobalt Capture

get_playbook

Read-only

Return the full text of a Cobalt study playbook: a step-by-step method for a kind of product review that ends in a shareable Cobalt review. Available: 'pricing_teardown' (can a buyer tell what they would pay and which tier fits; public pages only); 'website_teardown' (what each key page leads with and says, judged as a first-time visitor; public pages only; 'positioning_pass' is its old name); 'comparison_study' (two or three products compared for one buying decision, with a sourced matrix; public pages plus web search); 'usability_pass' (a first-time-user audit: a new user signs up and tries to get real jobs done, judged as a whole experience; needs a browser); 'flow_pass' (one specific flow the user names, such as checkout or inviting a teammate, walked step by step including its emails; needs a browser); 'investigation_pass' (a product investigation of an app the user owns, run in its own environment; needs a browser and usually the code); 'design_pass' (what the product looks like across nine phone, tablet and desktop sizes with menus, dialogs and forms opened: uneven padding, near-miss alignment, cut-off or colliding text, and a few hard fundamentals, nominated by a script in the page; needs a browser). The public-page studies work without a browser because add_screenshot(page_url) renders pages server-side. The same methods are offered as MCP prompts, and every playbook's full text is published at https://cobaltcapture.com/developers#playbooks. Each one tells the user its plan before acting, and the ones that sign up or use a product stop for the user's approval first.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	The site to run it against, if you already know it.
`name`	Yes	Playbook name, e.g. 'usability_pass'.
`companion_of`	No	design_pass only: the URL of the usability or scenario review this pass accompanies.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 20, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / companion_of

Added value: +{
+  "description": "design_pass only: the URL of the usability or scenario review this pass accompanies.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds real behavioral detail beyond them: every playbook announces its plan before acting, sign-up/product-use steps pause for user approval, and public-page studies avoid a browser because add_screenshot renders server-side. It does not describe return format or size, but the added workflow behavior is substantive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence carries information, though the single dense paragraph with embedded semicolons and parentheticals is heavy to parse. The trailing note about the public playbook URL is the weakest line but still aids the agent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only fetch tool with no output schema, the definition supplies the valid inputs, per-input prerequisites, and the user-approval workflow. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline would be 3, but the description compensates for the missing enum on the required 'name' parameter by enumerating every valid playbook name and flagging 'positioning_pass' as an alias. It also clarifies that browser-needing playbooks are a property of the chosen name, which the schema does not convey.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return the full text of a Cobalt study playbook') and immediately defines what a playbook is. It is unambiguously distinct from siblings like get_review or create_review.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description effectively routes selection by describing what each playbook is for (e.g. 'can a buyer tell what they would pay and which tier fits') and its preconditions ('needs a browser', 'public pages only'). It also notes alternatives exist ('offered as MCP prompts') but never explicitly states when to call this tool versus those alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Cobalt Capture tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?