Xcode MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Erase' implies a destructive operation, but it doesn't specify if data loss is permanent, what exactly gets erased (e.g., apps, settings, or both), or any side effects like requiring reconfiguration. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 destructive nature and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral risks, return values, or usage context, which are critical for safe and effective tool invocation in this environment.

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, with 'device_id' clearly documented as 'Simulator device ID'. The description doesn't add any parameter details beyond this, such as format examples or where to obtain the ID, but the schema provides adequate baseline information, justifying a score of 3.

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 action ('Erase') and target ('simulator data and settings'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'xcode_shutdown_simulator' or 'xcode_clean_project', which might have overlapping cleanup functions, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., if the simulator must be shut down first), exclusions, or related tools like 'xcode_shutdown_simulator' for stopping the simulator, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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