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. It states the action ('Install') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions (e.g., developer mode, provisioning profiles), whether it's destructive (e.g., overwrites existing app), rate limits, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 with zero waste, front-loading the core action and target. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, earning its place 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?

Given this is a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 2 parameters, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral context (e.g., side effects, error responses), prerequisites, or what happens post-installation, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('device_id' and 'app_path') with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Install') and target ('an app on a physical device'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'xcode_install_app_simulator' which targets simulators. However, it doesn't specify the exact resource (e.g., iOS/macOS app) or verb nuances (e.g., via Xcode), making it slightly less specific than a perfect 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 implies usage for physical devices, suggesting an alternative ('xcode_install_app_simulator') for simulators, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus others (e.g., prerequisites like device pairing, build requirements) or provide exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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