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 and successfully conveys that this tool performs inefficient fixed-time blocking ('doesn't waste time' implies the alternative is non-blocking/conditional). Could improve by explicitly stating if this blocks execution or has maximum limits.

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 well-structured sentences: purpose declaration, usage constraint, and alternative recommendation. Every sentence earns its place with zero redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 utility with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage constraints, sibling comparison, and implicit efficiency trade-offs 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?

Schema coverage is 100% ('Milliseconds to wait' is clear), establishing a baseline of 3. The description mentions 'milliseconds' but does not add validation constraints, format examples, or semantic nuances beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states the specific action ('Wait for a fixed time') and units ('milliseconds'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling 'safari_wait_for' by contrasting fixed-time waiting with conditional waiting.

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 states when to use ('only when you need a brief pause between actions') and names the specific alternative ('PREFER safari_wait_for') with clear reasoning ('smarter and doesn't waste time'), providing excellent guidance for tool selection.

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