xcode-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool's destructive nature (terminating an app) and specifies the behavioral constraint of not shutting down the simulator. However, it doesn't mention error conditions, permission requirements, or what happens if the app isn't running.

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 communicates the core purpose and key behavioral constraint without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the main action and immediately clarifies the scope limitation.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about what the tool does and its behavioral constraint. However, it doesn't mention what happens on success/failure or potential side effects, which would be helpful for a termination operation.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description doesn't add any additional semantic information about the parameters beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('terminate a running app') and the resource ('on a simulator'), while explicitly distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'simctl_shutdown' by noting it operates 'without shutting down the simulator'. This provides precise differentiation from related tools.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (to terminate an app while keeping the simulator running), but doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives. It implies usage relative to 'simctl_shutdown' but doesn't provide explicit exclusion criteria.

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