frida_script_set_log_handler

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Queue Script log-handler events for a loaded script', which lacks details on side effects, idempotency, error conditions, or what 'queue' entails. It does not state whether this sets the handler or enqueues events.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is too brief and lacks structure. It does not front-load critical information like parameter hints or usage context, making it minimally acceptable.

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 absence of an output schema and low schema coverage, the description should compensate with more detail. It fails to explain the tool's role within the Frida scripting environment, how it relates to sibling log-handler tools, or what the return value (if any) represents.

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 does not explain the purpose of the two parameters (script_id, session_id). The agent has no guidance on what values to provide, leaving it to infer from the names alone, which is insufficient.

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 uses the verb 'Queue' and the resource 'Script log-handler events', making the action and object clear. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like frida_script_get_log_handler or frida_script_reset_log_handler, and the term 'Queue' may cause confusion since the tool name says 'set'.

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 (e.g., get_log_handler, reset_log_handler). There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or 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.