frida_script_clear_events

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a destructive action ('clear') but does not mention side effects, reversibility, prerequisites, or impact on other scripts when clearing session events. Minimal transparency.

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 concise at one sentence. However, it lacks front-loading of key information and structure. While concise, it would benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description is incomplete. It does not cover parameter semantics, response behavior, or prerequisites. While the output schema is absent, a description of return values or side effects would improve completeness.

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, but it fails to explain any of the three parameters (script_id, session_id, kind). The phrase 'for one script or a whole session' vaguely implies two parameters, but the 'kind' parameter is entirely unaddressed.

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 action ('clear'), the resource ('queued events'), and the scope ('one script or a whole session'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like frida_script_get_events (get vs clear) and frida_session_clear_events (script vs session level).

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?

The description gives partial guidance by mentioning scope (one script or session), but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., when you want to retrieve events instead) or provide alternatives like frida_script_get_events or frida_session_clear_events.

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