Retrieve a browser profile's full data by UUID, including fingerprint, proxy, extensions, description, and tags. Use this to inspect or restore profile configuration.
Get full profile data by UUID: fingerprint, proxy, extensions, description, tags.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uuid | Yes | Profile UUID |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get' clearly signals a read-only retrieval and the field list states what is returned; no destructive or state-changing behavior is suggested. It does not discuss error conditions or permissions, but for a simple getter this is adequate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded, followed by a compact field list. No filler or redundant clauses.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has a single required parameter fully described by the schema, and an output schema exists. The description plus schema is sufficient for an agent to call this tool correctly, and there are no nested objects or complex edge cases requiring extra context.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already documents uuid as 'Profile UUID' with 100% coverage. The description's 'by UUID' restates the lookup role but adds no new constraint or format. Therefore the description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a specific verb ('Get'), the resource ('full profile data'), and the lookup key (UUID), and enumerates the data included. This distinguishes it from sibling getters like octo_get_extensions, octo_get_tags, and octo_get_proxies, as well as from lookup-by-name tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies it should be used when a UUID is already available and the caller wants the entire profile. It does not explicitly mention alternatives such as octo_find_profile_by_name or octo_search_profiles for cases where the UUID is unknown, so guidance is only implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.