frida_script_get_log_handler

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

With no annotations present, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, yet it omits any details about side effects, return values, or required permissions. The agent has no way to infer what happens when calling this function.

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 but fails to be useful; it is under-specified rather than concise. Every sentence should add value, and this single sentence adds none.

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 Frida tools, the lack of an output schema, and the need to understand how this tool interacts with others (e.g., set_log_handler, reset_log_handler), the description is completely inadequate.

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%, and the description adds no extra meaning to the two parameters (script_id, session_id). The schema itself provides only minimal titles, leaving the agent without guidance on acceptable values or purpose.

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 'Call Script.get_log_handler().' is a tautology that merely restates the function name without explaining what obtaining a log handler means or what the tool accomplishes. It fails to distinguish itself from sibling tools like frida_script_set_log_handler or frida_script_reset_log_handler.

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, nor are there any prerequisites, limitations, or context for its invocation.

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