Safari MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behavioral traits: cost ('EXPENSIVE') and return format ('base64 JPEG'). It does not disclose blocking behavior, timeouts, or state modification guarantees, but covers the critical cost characteristic.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: action/format declaration, cost warning with alternative, and specific use-case justification. Information is front-loaded and densely packed.

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 single-parameter tool without output schema, the description adequately covers the return type (base64 JPEG) and distinguishes from siblings. Could mention synchronous/blocking behavior, but sufficient for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single 'fullPage' parameter. The description adds no parameter-specific details, meeting the baseline expectation when the schema is self-documenting.

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 explicitly states the action ('Take a visual screenshot'), output format ('base64 JPEG'), and clearly distinguishes from the sibling 'safari_snapshot' tool by contrasting use cases.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative ('use safari_snapshot instead for most tasks'), provides the exclusion criterion ('EXPENSIVE'), and defines specific scenarios for use ('verify visual layout, styling, images, or colors').

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