Safari MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It adequately describes the main effect (restoring real network behavior) but omits whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if no mocks exist, or the scope (current tab vs. global).

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?

Single sentence of nine words with zero waste. The action is front-loaded ('Remove') and the parenthetical efficiently clarifies the behavioral outcome without redundancy.

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?

For a simple zero-parameter cleanup utility with no output schema, the description is appropriately complete. It could marginally improve by clarifying the scope (e.g., 'for the current page') but adequately covers the core functionality.

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 tool has zero parameters, warranting the baseline score of 4. The description appropriately requires no parameter explanation.

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?

Description provides a specific verb (Remove) and resource (network route mocks), clearly distinguishing from siblings like safari_mock_route (which creates mocks) and safari_clear_network (which likely clears logs/cache).

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 parenthetical '(restore real network behavior)' provides clear context for when to use the tool (when real network behavior is desired), though it doesn't explicitly reference safari_mock_route as the complementary tool to use first.

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