switch_safari_tab

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 states the tool switches tabs and returns a success or error message, but it does not disclose what happens with invalid indices, whether Safari needs to be frontmost, or any side effects.

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 extremely concise with a clear structure: a one-sentence purpose followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is necessary and there is no 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description is reasonably complete for basic use. However, it lacks error handling details and prerequisites (e.g., listing tabs first). The output schema exists but is not described, missing an opportunity to clarify return values.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds the constraint that tab_index must be greater than 0, which is not in the schema. However, it does not provide additional context like valid range or how to obtain valid indices.

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 switches to a specific Safari tab by index, with a 1-based index. It is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_safari_tabs or open_safari_tab beyond the method of selection (by index).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as listing tabs first or handling out-of-range indices. It does not mention prerequisites or caveats.

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