Safari MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: scope (whether per-page, per-tab, or persistent), duration of override, reversibility/cleanup requirements, side effects on existing geolocation watchers, or what the tool returns (void vs success status).

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 that is front-loaded and efficient with no redundant words. However, extreme brevity contributes to under-specification in other dimensions, preventing a 5.

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 stateful mocking tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It omits essential context: lifecycle management (how long the override lasts), relationship to sibling cleanup tools, authorization requirements, and impact on concurrent page operations.

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 has 100% description coverage with clear ranges and units. The description mentions 'custom coordinates' which loosely maps to latitude/longitude but adds no additional semantic detail, validation rules, or examples beyond the schema (baseline 3 for high coverage).

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?

Clear specific verb ('Override') and resource ('browser's geolocation API'), adequately conveying the mocking functionality. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools (e.g., when to use this versus safari_emulate or safari_mock_route), though the geolocation focus implicitly distinguishes it.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., requiring an active page session), or when not to use it. Missing relationship to safari_clear_mocks for cleanup.

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