Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mochi

Mochi

by DevZonayed
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

browser_playbook_get

Retrieve a browser automation playbook by its origin/feature identifier, including full metadata, body sections, and underlying workflow JSON.

Instructions

Return one playbook with full meta, body sections, and the underlying workflow JSON.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "browser_playbook_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes<origin>/<feature>

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation returning comprehensive data, but does not discuss behavior on missing IDs, rate limits, or any side effects. Adequate but minimal.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single, well-formed sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundancy or extra words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple get operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently specifies what is returned. Could optionally mention error behavior, but not essential.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% (the 'id' parameter has a description 'origin/feature'). The tool description adds no further detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states 'Return one playbook' and specifies the full contents (meta, body sections, workflow JSON). It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like browser_playbook_list which lists playbooks.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_playbook_list or browser_playbook_dashboard. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools