octo_start_one_time_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently reveals the key destructive behavior (profile is deleted after stopping) and notes performance and use-case characteristics. However, it omits details like prerequisites (e.g., Octo installed) or return values, but the most critical trait is disclosed.

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?

The description is exceptionally concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately state the key differentiator (temporary/deleted). Every word adds value, with no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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?

Given the simple parameter set and lack of output schema, the description covers the essential facts: what it does, key behavioral consequence, and a use case. It does not explain how the started profile connects to browser tools, but that's implicit from the sibling context. It is reasonably complete for the tool's complexity.

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 provides complete descriptions for both parameters (os and headless) with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter-related meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate; it does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 clearly states the tool's action ('Create and start') and resource ('one-time (temporary) Octo Browser profile'), while distinguishing it from the regular start profile by highlighting its temporary nature and deletion after stopping. This sets it apart from sibling tools like octo_start_profile.

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 provides clear usage context: it's ideal for scraping and emphasizes the temporary lifecycle ('deleted after stopping'). This implies when to use it, though it does not explicitly state exclusions or when to prefer a regular profile. Sibling tool names help, but the description itself gives sufficient guidance.

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