safari_reload_extension

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the extension briefly disconnects during reload and auto-reconnects within ~2 seconds, and that it requires the extension to support the command (v2.9.1+). This adds value beyond the empty schema.

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 concise (two sentences plus a note) and front-loaded. Every sentence contributes: action, use case, behavior, and prerequisite. No redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, side effects, and version requirement. It is fully adequate for the agent to understand when and how to use it.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details (none needed), but clarifies the tool's action and context, which is sufficient.

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?

Clearly states the action: 'Hot-reload the Safari MCP Bridge extension — forces it to reload its own code from disk'. It specifies the exact files (background.js, content.js) and distinguishes from other safari tools (e.g., safari_reload reloads a page, not the extension).

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?

Describes when to use: 'Use after editing extension/background.js or extension/content.js in the safari-mcp repo.' Also mentions the version requirement (v2.9.1+) and the brief disconnect behavior. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is sufficient.

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