Detach from Process

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses the main behavioral aspects: it detaches Frida and unloads scripts. It also implies a state change by mandating a re-attach. While it does not detail all possible side effects, the information is adequate for a parameterless tool.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. Both sentences provide essential information without any filler. The key action and the crucial post-condition are front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, when to call it, and what must be done after (re-attach). It also implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning attach.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information, earning a baseline score of 4 as per guidelines.

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 verb 'detach' and the resource 'from the current process' and specifies that it unloads all persistent scripts. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like attach, load_script, and unload_script.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'when finished with the target or before attaching to a different process'. It also provides a critical post-condition: must call attach again before other tools. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it.

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