softglaze-browser-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Generate many profiles

batch_generate_profiles

Creates up to 50 browser profiles at once, each with a unique fingerprint and a live-checked proxy, and asks for confirmation before starting.

Instructions

Creates up to 50 profiles at once with unique generated fingerprints and, by default, one working proxy each from your pool (proxySource unique; optionally from one country). Proxies are live-checked first; profiles meant to have a proxy are never created without one. Asks the user first. Long runs continue in the background: follow them with get_run_status.

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": {
      "count": "<count>"
    },
    "name": "batch_generate_profiles"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`os`	No
`count`	Yes
`group`	No	Existing group for the new profiles.
`country`	No
`startUrl`	No
`namePrefix`	No
`deviceClass`	No
`proxySource`	No	unique (default): one unused working proxy each; pool: reuse working proxies; free: working free proxies (not for logged-in accounts); none: no proxy.
`newGroupName`	No	Create this group for them instead.
`proxyGroupId`	No	Only take proxies from this proxy group.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false): it discloses pre-flight proxy live-checks, a hard invariant that profiles requiring a proxy are never created without one, an interactive user confirmation step, and asynchronous background continuation. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before calling a non-idempotent batch mutation.

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?

Four front-loaded sentences, each carrying distinct information: scope, proxy defaults, safety invariants, and the background follow-up path. Nested parentheticals add slight density but no sentence is filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 10-parameter, non-idempotent creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical behavioral risks (confirmation, proxy guarantee, async follow-up) but leaves most creation parameters (startUrl, namePrefix, deviceClass, group targeting) unexplained. An agent can call it safely but not confidently tailor the profiles.

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 coverage is only 40% across 10 parameters, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning for count (50 cap), country (single-country proxy selection), and proxySource semantics (the 'never without a proxy' guarantee), but os, group, newGroupName, startUrl, namePrefix, deviceClass, and proxyGroupId remain undocumented in both places.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Creates up to 50 profiles at once with unique generated fingerprints'. The batch size plus fingerprint/proxy generation distinguishes it from a single-profile create, though it never explicitly names create_profile as the single-item alternative.

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?

Gives clear operating context: default proxySource=unique, optional single-country restriction, and an explicit instruction to follow long runs with get_run_status. It does not state exclusion cases (e.g., when to prefer create_profile repeatedly or proxySource=none), so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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