System Set Increase Contrast

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

Annotations indicate the operation is not idempotent and not destructive, but the description adds no behavioral detail: it doesn't explain what 'enabled' does, whether system settings are persisted, whether permissions are needed, or what side effects may occur. The description contributes nothing beyond the annotations.

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 short, but brevity is not value: the only sentence is boilerplate that restates the name and the MCP wrapper. It contains no usable information and does not earn its place.

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?

Although the parameter surface is simple, the description is still incomplete for an agent deciding whether to call this tool. It doesn't state the tool's effect, when it applies, or how it differs from related system-setting tools. The output schema does not compensate for the missing behavioral 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented boolean parameter. It does not mention 'enabled' at all, leaving the agent to guess whether true/false turns contrast enhancement on or off.

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 merely restates the tool name and adds a generic wrapper phrase ('Delegated Apple domain tool exposed through Apple-Tools-MCP'). It does not state what the tool actually does, such as enabling or disabling the system 'Increase Contrast' accessibility setting.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus sibling tools like system_set_reduce_motion, system_set_reduce_transparency, or system_set_appearance_mode. The agent must infer all selection context from the name alone.

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