frida_java_backtrace

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only states the action without explaining side effects, resource requirements, return format, or safety. For a tool that likely captures runtime information in a target process, behavioral traits are critically underspecified.

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 (one sentence) but does not effectively use the space. It lacks structure such as parameter descriptions or usage notes, making it under-specified rather than concise.

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 annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter info, the description is severely incomplete. It omits essential details like return value, error conditions, and usage context, making it nearly useless for safe invocation.

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 adds no parameter explanations. The two parameters (target, duration_seconds) are not described; an agent cannot infer what 'target' refers to (e.g., process name/ID) or how 'duration_seconds' affects the backtrace capture.

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 states the tool captures Java.backtrace() inside Java.perform(), which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly indicates the action, but lacks detail on how the capture is delivered or used, and doesn't distinguish it from sibling tools like frida_java_hook_method or frida_callstack_tracer.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or the type of application (e.g., Android Java processes) where this is applicable.

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