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. It successfully discloses the temporal dependency (prerequisite call required), but fails to clarify critical behavioral traits: whether this is a destructive read (clears the capture buffer), safe to call repeatedly, or what errors occur if called before initialization.

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?

Perfectly concise single sentence with zero waste. Critical prerequisite information is efficiently placed in parentheses without cluttering the primary purpose statement. Every word earns 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?

The prerequisite coverage is essential and well-handled, but given the absence of both annotations and output schema, the description should explain what 'full details' entails (headers, bodies, timing) and whether captured data persists after retrieval. Currently underspecified for a data-retrieval tool.

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 100% (both limit and filter are well-documented in the schema). The description adds no explicit parameter semantics, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema adequately documents usage.

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 ('Get') with clear resource ('captured network requests') and scope ('full details'). It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling safari_start_network_capture (which initiates capture) and safari_network (likely basic info) by specifying this retrieves already-captured data.

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?

Excellent guidance: explicitly states the prerequisite 'must call safari_start_network_capture first', establishing the correct sequence and implicitly defining when NOT to use the tool (before capture starts). Naming the specific sibling tool as a prerequisite provides clear workflow context.

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