apple_safari_get_tab

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description nonetheless adds two genuine behavioral facts beyond that: text reads are bounded, and the tool will not execute page JavaScript, which is a meaningful security constraint. It does not cover error/failure modes, which keeps it off a 5.

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 tight sentences with the read-only qualifier and the return payload front-loaded; every clause carries information and nothing is padded.

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, the description correctly carries the return contract (title, URL, optional bounded text) and notes the scripting mechanism. It is slightly thin on identifying what windowId/tabIndex refer to and on failure behavior, but is otherwise sufficient for a read-only single-record tool.

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 0% across four parameters, so the description must compensate and only partially does: 'optional bounded page text' maps to includeText/maxChars but gives no format or default hints. The two required parameters, windowId and tabIndex, are entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('read one Safari tab'), names exactly what is returned (title and URL, optional bounded page text), and scopes it to a single tab, which separates it from apple_safari_list_tabs, apple_safari_close_tab and apple_safari_navigate_tab without opening their schemas.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the read path for tab content, and the 'Does not execute page JavaScript' clause marks a boundary. However, no sibling is named and there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not guidance versus apple_safari_list_tabs or apple_pages_read_text.

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