Skip to main content
Glama
fuzzmind

fuzzmind-frida-mcp

by fuzzmind

frida_script_load

Load a persistent Frida script into a session to inject code that can emit events, receive messages, and expose callable functions via RPC.

Instructions

Load a long-running Frida script into a persistent session.

The script remains loaded until explicitly unloaded or the session disconnects. Use send() in JavaScript to emit events, recv() to receive messages, and rpc.exports to expose callable functions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
js_codeYes
session_idNo
nameNo
kindNoscript
event_limitNo
runtimeNo
parametersNo
auto_performNo
enable_debuggerNo
debugger_portNo
exit_on_errorNo
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses long-running nature, persistence until unload/disconnect, and communication methods. However, it omits details on error handling or effects of parameters like exit_on_error.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two concise sentences front-load the purpose, with second and third sentences adding essential lifecycle and API details. Every sentence is valuable with no redundancy.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (11 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description lacks completeness. It does not explain how parameters like session_id, event_limit, or runtime affect behavior, nor indicate success/failure feedback.

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 should explain parameters but fails to mention any. All 11 parameters, including required js_code, are undocumented in the description, leaving agents without guidance.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool loads a long-running Frida script into a persistent session, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'long-running' and 'persistent session', which sets it apart from other script loading tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context on script persistence and communication via send/recv/rpc.exports, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like frida_script_load_file or frida_script_load_bytes, nor state when not to use it.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/fuzzmind/frida-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server