frida_compiler_build

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors beyond the action, but it only states that it builds a bundle. It does not mention side effects (e.g., file creation), return value, or whether it requires a device/process, leaving significant behavioral 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 a single sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It fails to provide necessary information, so the brevity is a liability.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the build process, output, prerequisites, or any contextual details needed for correct usage.

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 description adds no information about any of the 9 parameters. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not elaborate on parameter meanings, defaults, or constraints beyond what the schema's titles provide (which are minimal).

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 'Build' and the resource 'a Frida agent bundle', and references the underlying API method. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like frida_cli_compile_bundle or frida_compiler_watch, which serve similar purposes but via different methods.

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 compared to alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. The description simply states the action without offering decision-making criteria.

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