frida_file_write

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains mode for text/binary but fails to specify whether writing overwrites or appends, required permissions, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a mutation 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 concise and well-structured, with a short summary followed by parameter definitions. Every sentence adds value, and there is no wasted text.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks important context such as file overwrite behavior, prerequisites (e.g., an active session), or handling of invalid inputs. It is incomplete for a tool that modifies files on a process.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description adds meaning for all 4 parameters. It explains target, path, data_hex_or_text, and mode. However, it does not specify the expected format of hex bytes (e.g., with or without spaces) or validate mode options beyond the two mentioned.

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 'write' and the resource 'file on the target process's filesystem', distinguishing it from sibling file tools like frida_file_read (read) and frida_file_list (list). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from all file-related siblings such as frida_file_download.

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. There are no prerequisites, context, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent without direction for selection.

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