ui_describe_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'describes' strongly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose the output format, whether the simulator must be booted, or any other behavioral nuances beyond the intrinsic meaning.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and context. Every word earns its place; the '[ios-simulator-mcp]' prefix adds useful namespace context without redundancy.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should clarify what the agent will receive back. It states the content type ('accessibility information') but not the format or structure, nor does it provide usage context relative to sibling tools. Adequate for a simple read tool but with notable gaps.

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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter (udid) is fully documented, including the IDB_UDID env var fallback. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Describes') and resource ('accessibility information for the entire screen in the iOS Simulator'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like ui_find_element that target specific elements or ui_layout_audit that audits layout.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While 'entire screen' implies a global overview, it does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or name alternative tools for more targeted queries.

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