safari_list_frames

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It clearly discloses the tool's return behavior and scope (all frames in the tab, with text length). While it doesn't explicitly state there are no side effects, 'list' strongly implies a read-only operation, and the guidance is otherwise transparent.

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 front-loaded with the tool's definition and output fields, then immediately gives usage context and alternatives. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 discovery tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is returned, when to use it, why alternatives fail, and how to apply the result to a related tool. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke it correctly.

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 schema covers the single optional receipt parameter with 100% coverage, so the description doesn't add parameter-level details. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already fully documents the parameter and the description provides no additional semantic info about it.

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 uses a specific verb ('List every document in the tab') and specifies the exact output fields (frameId, URL, text length), making it unmistakable what this tool does. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from safari_read_page and safari_evaluate, which address the main document only.

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?

It states exactly when to use this tool — when content lives in a cross-origin iframe — and explains the failure mode of the alternatives ('come back empty or with a loader'). It also tells the agent how to use the result, by passing frameId or URL substring to safari_evaluate.

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