get_safari_page_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires Safari to be frontmost, or what happens if no page is loaded. It only mentions error message return, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, return format briefly described. Exceptionally concise.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists (context signal true), the description adequately lists return fields. However, it omits contextual prerequisites like requiring Safari to be open or active, and does not specify whether it works for all page types.

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, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. Per calibration, 0 params yields baseline 4. The description does not need to add parameter info and it doesn't.

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 clearly states the tool gets information about the current Safari page, listing specific fields (URL, title, text, source). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_safari_tabs, which lists tabs, and reload_safari_page, which refreshes.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it does not mention that for dynamic content run_safari_javascript might be more appropriate, or that it requires Safari to be active.

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