frida_bus_get_events

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

Lacks annotations. The description only states it's a read operation but does not disclose key behaviors such as whether reading clears events, if it is blocking, or what happens when no events exist. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 at 4 words, but it sacrifices essential detail. It is not well-structured as it fails to include parameter descriptions or usage notes.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and 3 undocumented parameters, the description is wholly inadequate. An agent would lack the information needed to invoke this tool correctly, especially the impact of the 'clear' and 'limit' parameters.

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 provides no explanations for the three parameters (bus_id, clear, limit). Agents cannot infer their meanings or defaults from the description alone.

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 'Read queued bus events.' clearly states the action (read) and the resource (bus events). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like frida_bus_post and frida_bus_attach, which are write or connection operations.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like frida_bus_post or other event-reading tools (frida_event_get_events). Implies usage only through the resource name, but no explicit context or exclusion.

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