en es ja ko zh

apple-notifier-mcp

Name: apple-notifier-mcp
Author: turlockmike

by turlockmike

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Apple 通知程序 MCP 服务器

铁匠徽章通过任何与 MCP 兼容的客户端（如 Claude Desktop 或 Cline）发送原生 macOS 通知并与系统对话框交互。

先决条件

macOS
Node.js >= 18
与 MCP 兼容的客户端（Claude Desktop、Cline）

Related MCP server: apple-notifier-mcp

安装

通过 Smithery 安装

要通过Smithery自动为 Claude Desktop 安装 Apple Notifier：

npx -y @smithery/cli install apple-notifier-mcp --client claude

手动安装

全局安装包：

npm install -g apple-notifier-mcp

添加到您的 MCP 配置文件：

对于 Cline（ cline_mcp_settings.json ）：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "apple-notifier": {
      "command": "apple-notifier-mcp"
    }
  }
}

对于 Claude 桌面（ claude_desktop_config.json ）：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "apple-notifier": {
      "command": "apple-notifier-mcp"
    }
  }
}

特征

发送通知

显示具有可自定义内容的原生 macOS 通知。

参数：

title （必需）：字符串 - 通知的标题
message （必需）：字符串 - 主要消息内容
subtitle （可选）：字符串 - 要显示的字幕
sound （可选）：布尔值 - 是否播放默认通知声音（默认值：true）

显示提示

显示交互式对话框提示以获取用户输入。

参数：

message （必需）：字符串 - 提示对话框中显示的文本
defaultAnswer （可选）：字符串 - 预填充的默认文本
buttons （可选）：string[] - 自定义按钮标签（最多 3 个）
icon （可选）：'注意' | '停止' | '警告' - 要显示的图标

文本转语音

使用 macOS 文本转语音功能。

参数：

text （必需）：字符串 - 文本朗读
voice （可选）：字符串 - 要使用的语音（默认为系统语音）
rate （可选）：数字 - 语速（-50 到 50，默认为 0）

截取屏幕截图

使用 macOS 屏幕截图功能捕获屏幕截图。

参数：

path （必需）：字符串 - 保存屏幕截图的路径
type （必需）：'全屏' | '窗口' | '选择' - 屏幕截图类型
format （可选）：'png' | 'jpg' | 'pdf' | 'tiff' - 图像格式
hideCursor （可选）：布尔值 - 是否隐藏光标
shadow （可选）：布尔值 - 是否包含窗口阴影（仅适用于窗口类型）
timestamp （可选）：布尔值 - 将时间戳添加到文件名

文件选择

打开原生 macOS 文件选择器对话框。

参数：

prompt （可选）：string - 提示信息
defaultLocation （可选）：字符串 - 默认目录路径
fileTypes （可选）：对象 - 文件类型过滤器（例如，{“public.image”：[“png”，“jpg”]}）
multiple （可选）：布尔值 - 允许选择多个文件

示例用法

// Send a notification
await client.use_mcp_tool("apple-notifier", "send_notification", {
  title: "Hello",
  message: "World",
  sound: true
});

// Show a prompt
const result = await client.use_mcp_tool("apple-notifier", "prompt_user", {
  message: "What's your name?",
  defaultAnswer: "John Doe",
  buttons: ["OK", "Cancel"]
});

// Speak text
await client.use_mcp_tool("apple-notifier", "speak", {
  text: "Hello, world!",
  voice: "Samantha",
  rate: -20
});

// Take a screenshot
await client.use_mcp_tool("apple-notifier", "take_screenshot", {
  path: "screenshot.png",
  type: "window",
  format: "png"
});

// Select files
const files = await client.use_mcp_tool("apple-notifier", "select_file", {
  prompt: "Select images",
  fileTypes: {
    "public.image": ["png", "jpg", "jpeg"]
  },
  multiple: true
});

贡献

请参阅CONTRIBUTING.md了解开发设置和指南。

执照

MIT 许可证 - 有关详细信息，请参阅LICENSE文件。

Available Tools

5 tools

prompt_userA

Display a dialog prompt to get user input

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`message`	Yes	Text to display in the prompt dialog
`defaultAnswer`	No	Optional default text to pre-fill
`buttons`	No	Optional custom button labels (max 3)
`icon`	No	Optional icon to display

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose blocking behavior (waits for user input) or any side effects. It adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Fully earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple prompt tool with 4 params and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It implies the return value (user input) but misses mentioning that the tool blocks execution until input is given.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with clear param descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, scoring baseline 3.

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 the action ('Display a dialog prompt') and purpose ('to get user input'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'send_notification' (no input) and 'select_file' (file selection).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for general text input but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or when not to use (e.g., if a simple notification suffices).

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

select_fileB

Open native file picker dialog

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prompt`	No	Optional prompt message
`defaultLocation`	No	Optional default directory path
`fileTypes`	No	Optional file type filter (e.g., {"public.image": ["png", "jpg"]})
`multiple`	No	Whether to allow multiple selection

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations present, so description must carry full burden. It only says 'Open native file picker dialog', omitting behavior like blocking, return values, cancellation handling, or permissions.

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?

Single sentence is appropriately sized and front-loaded, no extraneous content.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Lacks explanation of return value or behavior for a tool with no output schema and no annotations. Does not cover user interaction results.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Open' and resource 'native file picker dialog', distinguishing it from sibling tools like prompt_user, send_notification, etc.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; no when-not-to-use or context provided.

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

send_notificationB

Send a notification on macOS using osascript

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Title of the notification
`message`	Yes	Main message content
`subtitle`	No	Optional subtitle
`sound`	No	Whether to play the default notification sound

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It specifies the platform ('macOS') but fails to describe the tool's behavior such as whether it is blocking, what it returns, or error conditions (e.g., if osascript is unavailable). Minimal disclosure beyond the platform.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately front-loaded and efficient for its purpose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has 4 parameters (2 required) and no output schema or annotations. The description does not address return values, errors, or platform dependencies beyond mentioning macOS. This is insufficient for reliable agent invocation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's param descriptions, which already cover title, message, subtitle, and sound.

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 the action ('send a notification') and the resource ('macOS' via 'osascript'), and it is distinct from sibling tools which involve user prompts, file selection, speech output, and screenshots.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer based solely on the tool name and sibling context.

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

speakC

Speak text using macOS text-to-speech

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	Text to speak
`voice`	No	Voice to use (defaults to system voice)
`rate`	No	Speech rate (-50 to 50, defaults to 0)

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral details. It only states 'Speak text,' omitting any mention of side effects (e.g., audio output), blocking behavior, or system requirements, which is insufficient for safe invocation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's function. It is appropriately front-loaded without unnecessary words, though slightly more detail could be added without harming conciseness.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the simplicity of the tool and the comprehensive schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks mention of return value or behavior, which would be expected for a tool with no output schema.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not detract either.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Speak') and the resource ('text using macOS text-to-speech'), making the purpose unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like prompt_user or take_screenshot, though no explicit differentiation is provided.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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

take_screenshotC

Take a screenshot using macOS screencapture

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Path where to save the screenshot
`type`	Yes	Type of screenshot to take
`format`	No	Image format
`hideCursor`	No	Whether to hide the cursor
`shadow`	No	Whether to include the window shadow (only for window type)
`timestamp`	No	Timestamp to add to filename

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Mentions 'macOS screencapture' to hint at system call, but fails to state that it saves to file, requires display permissions, or that it blocks execution. No behavioral traits disclosed beyond basic action.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

One sentence, no extra words, efficient. However, lacks structure (e.g., bullet points) that could improve readability for such a multi-param tool.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, description is too sparse. Does not explain return value (saved file path?), does not mention side effects (file write), and omits important nuances like when to use different screenshot types.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no extra meaning beyond what schema already provides for parameters.

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

Purpose4/5

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

Clear verb (take) and resource (screenshot) with specific underlying tool (macOS screencapture). Distinguishes from sibling tools which are all unrelated. Could mention the types of screenshots (fullscreen, window, selection) but schema covers that.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No explicit context for when to capture full screen vs window vs selection, or when to use timestamp feature.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

5 tool updatesv1.0.0Aug 18, 2025
- First observedprompt_user
- First observedselect_file
- First observedsend_notification
- First observedspeak
- First observedtake_screenshot

Deploy Server

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Scored 2026-04-29 15:15 across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinctly different macOS capability: user input, file selection, notification, text-to-speech, and screenshot. No overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow an imperative verb pattern with optional noun (e.g., prompt_user, select_file, send_notification, take_screenshot), and 'speak' fits as a single-verb imperative.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools covering common macOS interactions, the count is well-scoped for a utility server—not too many and not too few.

Completeness4/5

The set covers core macOS utilities (notification, dialogs, TTS, screenshot), though the server name suggests a narrower focus on notifications. Minor additions like clipboard or open URL could enhance completeness.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Related MCP Connectors

Second server!
com.fenetresurciel.verylongmcp
A non functional MCP server (yet)
Developer Tools
2
GRACE Hello MCP A
io.github.rajitharul
A very simple remote MCP server that greets you, with a custom icon.
Developer Tools
2
smithery-ai-cookbook-python-quickstart
ai.smithery
A simple MCP server built with FastMCP and python
Developer Tools
213
acme-todo
com.ritzademo
An MCP server for a simple todo list
Developer Tools App Automation
2

Related MCP Servers

bark-mcp-server
Communication Workplace & Productivity
metrovoc
A
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for sending iOS push notifications via Bark.
Updated a year ago (2025-06-19 12:22 UTC)
3
13 npm
4
MIT
apple-notifier-mcp
OS Automation Command Line Speech Processing
piatra-automation
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Enhanced MCP server for sending native macOS notifications with terminal-notifier, interactive dialogs, text-to-speech, screenshots, and file selection.
Updated a year ago (2025-07-01 13:01 UTC)
39 npm
1
MIT
mcp-gotify
Communication
fastmcp-me
A
license
B
quality
D
maintenance
MCP server for sending Gotify push notifications to your devices.
Updated a year ago (2025-10-10 18:54 UTC)
1
MIT
MCPal
Developer Tools Workplace & Productivity
mjkid221
A
license
A
quality
C
maintenance
A lightweight MCP server that enables sending native desktop notifications with action buttons and text replies, compatible with any MCP client.
Updated 8 months ago (2026-02-09 22:10 UTC)
1
21 npm
1
MIT

Apple 通知程序 MCP 服务器

先决条件

安装

通过 Smithery 安装

手动安装

特征

发送通知

显示提示

文本转语音

截取屏幕截图

文件选择

示例用法

贡献

执照

Available Tools

Tool Schema Changelog

Maintenance

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches