safari-browser-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

browser_resize

Resize the Safari browser window that contains a tab by setting its width and height, so you can test layouts or fit pages to a specific viewport.

Instructions

Resize the browser window that contains the tab.

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": {
      "width": "<width>",
      "height": "<height>"
    },
    "name": "browser_resize"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tabId`	No	Tab id from browser_tabs. Default: current tab.
`width`	Yes
`height`	Yes
`backend`	No	Backend: real = your Safari, driver = isolated safaridriver session. Default: session default.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but discloses only the basic mutation. It does not state units, whether resizing affects the viewport, screenshots, or persisted state, or how the backend choice changes behavior.

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?

The single sentence is front-loaded and contains no wasted wording. Its brevity is efficient, though the missing detail is penalized in other dimensions rather than here.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a four-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits crucial context about units, required values, backend behavior, and what resizing the containing window actually affects.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 50%; tabId and backend have schema descriptions, but width and height have only numeric bounds and no unit or viewport semantics. The description adds no parameter meaning to compensate for that gap.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: resizing the browser window that contains the tab. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools, but the operation is clear enough for an agent to identify.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer that it should be called when a window resize is needed.

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