Extract modal view data from iOS apps for UI analysis and debugging using Frida.
[debug] dumpModalView. BLOCKED on TikTok. Daily probe: do not use.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "dump_modal"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses almost no behavioral traits. It only mentions being blocked on TikTok and being a daily probe, which warns against use but does not describe any side effects, output, or operational details.
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 short, but its brevity sacrifices clarity and usefulness. The phrase 'do not use' conflicts with the concept of a usable tool definition.
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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description fails to provide sufficient context for the tool's operation. A debug tool should explain what it dumps and under what conditions.
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?
With zero parameters, the input schema is fully covered by default. The description adds no parameter information, but according to the rubric, 0 parameters warrant a baseline of 4.
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 vaguely indicates a debug function ('dumpModalView') but is unclear on what exactly it accomplishes. It labels the tool as blocked and not for use, obscuring its actual purpose.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool; instead, the description explicitly states 'do not use', which is negative guidance without alternatives or context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.