Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fuzzmind-frida-mcp

fuzzmind-frida-mcp

by fuzzmind
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

frida_memory_scan_sync

Scan memory synchronously over a given address range using a byte pattern to locate matching regions in a target process.

Instructions

Call GumJS Memory.scanSync().

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "target": "<target>",
      "address": "<address>",
      "size": "<size>",
      "pattern": "<pattern>"
    },
    "name": "frida_memory_scan_sync"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYes
addressYes
sizeYes
patternYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it blocks (synchronous), what it returns, or side effects. The description carries the full burden but provides no insight.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise (one sentence) but is under-specified. It provides minimal information, sacrificing value for brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (4 required params, no output schema, many sibling tools), the description is woefully incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool does, how to use it, or what results to expect.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not explain any of the 4 required parameters (target, address, size, pattern). Users have no idea what these parameters mean.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Call GumJS Memory.scanSync()' states a specific action (calling a function) but does not explain what that function does or why it's useful. It distinguishes itself from siblings by the 'sync' suffix, but lacks clarity on the overall purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 vs alternatives. There is a sibling 'frida_memory_scan' which likely is the async version, but no comparison or usage context is given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools