Safari MCP Server

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 but fails to specify critical side effects: which tab becomes active after closing, whether the operation can fail (e.g., protected tabs), if confirmation dialogs appear, or what the return value indicates. The word 'close' implies destruction but lacks explicit safety context.

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 extremely concise at three words, with no filler or redundant content. Given the simplicity of the operation and absence of parameters, this length is appropriate and front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter tool without output schema or annotations, the description minimally covers the core operation. However, gaps remain regarding post-close behavior (tab focus changes), error conditions, and interaction with the browser's tab lifecycle, preventing a higher score.

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 contains zero parameters, establishing a baseline score of 4. The description appropriately does not invent parameter semantics where none exist, though it could have clarified that the tool operates on the implicit 'current' tab context without requiring identifiers.

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 verb (close) and resource (tab), making the tool's function immediately obvious. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like safari_new_tab or safari_switch_tab, nor does it clarify what 'current' means in this context.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., safari_switch_tab if the user wants to preserve the page state). It omits prerequisites, such as whether the agent should verify the correct tab is active before closing, or what happens when closing the last tab.

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