frida_android_port_forward_remove

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose effects. It states 'Remove' indicating mutability, but omits important details: what happens if the forward doesn't exist, whether it requires a device connection, or if it interrupts active forwarding. The lack of behavioral context undermines safe usage.

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—one sentence—but this brevity sacrifices essential detail. It is not bloated, yet the minimalism leaves gaps that could be filled without harming conciseness, such as parameter hints.

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's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to cover prerequisites, side effects, or parameter roles, which are critical for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain the two parameters (adb_serial, local_port). Their meaning, defaults, and usage remain undocumented, forcing the agent to infer intent without sufficient information.

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 uses a clear verb ('Remove') and identifies the resource ('adb TCP port forward'). It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like frida_android_port_forward (create) and frida_android_port_forward_list (list), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., existence of a forward), error conditions, or scenarios where removal is appropriate, leaving the agent without contextual decision-making support.

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