frida_script_export_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'export' but does not clarify if the operation is destructive (e.g., clearing events via the 'clear' parameter), whether it requires certain permissions, or what the side effects are.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks enough information. It could be expanded without losing conciseness to include important details.

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 complexity of the tool (7 parameters, many similar siblings, no output schema), the description fails to explain what 'queued script events' are, how they are generated, or what the output file contains. Incomplete for correct 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should explain parameters. It only mentions output format briefly. None of the 7 parameters (e.g., output_path, script_id, clear, limit) are described, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and defaults.

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 (export) and resource (queued script events) with specific output formats (JSON or JSONL). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like frida_script_get_events or frida_event_get_events that might retrieve events without file export.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like frida_script_get_events or frida_script_clear_events. Missing context on prerequisites (e.g., events must be queued first) or when not to use.

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