frida_enable_child_gating

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavior (child processes suspended) and a precondition (active session). However, it omits details like whether existing children are affected, how to resume, or error behavior, leaving some gaps.

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 concise, front-loaded, and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds useful information: purpose, behavior, and parameter meaning.

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 toggle operation, the description covers the core behavior and prerequisite. An output schema is present, so return values are not required. It could mention the corresponding disable tool or resume interaction, but overall it's adequately complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that pid is the target process PID and must have an active session, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare integer type.

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 states 'Enable child gating on a session' and explains the effect on child processes, making the purpose clear. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling frida_enable_spawn_gating, but the verb and resource are specific enough.

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?

Provides context that child processes are suspended until resumed and notes that the pid must have an active session. It doesn't mention alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use is implied clearly.

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