MCP Safari Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral context. It states what the tool does but doesn't disclose important traits like whether it saves the screenshot automatically, where it's saved, what format it uses, if it requires specific permissions, or what happens on failure. 'Take a screenshot' implies a write operation, but details are missing.

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 purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core functionality immediately.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It lacks context about the result (e.g., returns file path or just takes screenshot), error conditions, or dependencies. Without annotations, it should provide more behavioral detail for proper agent use.

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% for the single parameter 'filename', which is documented as optional. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as filename format constraints or default naming behavior. With high schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Take a screenshot') and target resource ('current Safari window'). It precisely distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'get_page_info' or 'get_console_logs' which provide different types of page information without visual capture.

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., Safari must be open), exclusions (e.g., cannot capture hidden windows), or suggest when other tools might be more appropriate for different needs.

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