frida_resume_process

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

No annotations are provided, so the description shoulders the burden. It only states the action (resume) without discussing side effects, failure conditions, or state requirements (e.g., process must be suspended). The description lacks behavioral details beyond the basic operation.

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?

Two concise sentences followed by parameter explanations. The main action is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

For a simple mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential usage. However, it lacks any indication of post-resume state or error handling, and could better differentiate from the sibling frida_session_resume. It is minimally adequate.

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 must compensate. It does: explains target_pid as 'integer process ID' and device_id as 'optional Frida device id; defaults to local device.' This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type definitions.

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?

Clearly states 'Resume a suspended process by PID' and 'Standalone resume for processes spawned but not yet resumed.' The verb and resource are specific. It distinguishes from session-level resume by emphasizing standalone, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools like frida_session_resume.

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?

Provides explicit context: 'for processes spawned but not yet resumed.' This hints at appropriate use cases but does not mention when not to use or list alternatives. The guidance is minimal but sufficient for a simple tool.

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