Safari MCP Server

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 the terminal state ('desktop mode') but omits behavioral details such as whether the operation is idempotent, if it triggers a page reload, or the specific viewport/UA changes involved. It meets minimum disclosure for a simple state-reset tool.

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 a single 7-word sentence with zero redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and appropriately sized for a simple, parameter-less tool where no additional elaboration is necessary.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, single state change), the description is complete. It adequately explains the transformation (emulation → desktop) without needing to detail return values. A perfect score would require explicit reference to the counterpart 'safari_emulate' 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?

The tool has zero parameters with 100% schema coverage. Per calibration guidelines, this establishes a baseline of 4. The description appropriately requires no parameter clarification since the schema is empty.

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 provides a specific verb ('Reset'), clear resource ('device emulation'), and target state ('back to desktop mode'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling 'safari_emulate' by indicating this is the inverse operation that returns to default desktop state.

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 implies usage context (use when exiting device emulation to return to desktop), but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or named alternatives. The agent must infer the relationship to 'safari_emulate' from the tool name alone.

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