apple-photos-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

health-check

Verify osxphotos installation and Photos library accessibility, returning status, version, path, and photo count.

Instructions

Use when: you want a quick smoke test that osxphotos is installed and the Photos library can be opened. Returns: ok/fail plus the osxphotos version, library path, and total photo count. While another operation (a long query or export) is running, it responds immediately with a liveness summary instead of queueing behind it — re-run after the operation completes for the full result. Do not use when: you need a full setup diagnostic that pinpoints whether the failure is a missing osxphotos, an unreadable library, or denied Full Disk Access — use doctor instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`message`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.13Sep 24, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.9Aug 7, 2026
- changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```

Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0Jun 23, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.4May 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the return payload (ok/fail, version, path, photo count) and the liveness behavior when another operation is running. This is valuable context. It doesn't mention permission requirements or error specifics, but those are handled by the doctor tool, so this is acceptable. A small gap is the lack of explicit statement that it is read-only, but the smoke-test nature implies that.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is efficiently structured with clear sections (Use when, Returns, Do not use when). It is front-loaded with the purpose and avoids fluff. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter health-check tool, the description covers its purpose, return values, and behavioral nuance (liveness) while distinguishing from the more thorough doctor tool. The existence of an output schema covers the detailed return format. Nothing critical is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter meanings to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description correctly omits parameter details. No additional value needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific purpose: a quick smoke test for osxphotos installation and library openability. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the 'doctor' tool, which is a fuller diagnostic. This makes the tool's role unambiguous and separates it from siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' conditions, naming the alternative (doctor) and the specific scenario where that alternative should be chosen. This gives an agent clear routing guidance.

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