frida_service_request_by_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'send a request', which implies a mutation, but does not explain side effects, error conditions, or the nature of the request. It fails to disclose whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or requires specific permissions.

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 might appear concise, but it is severely under-specified. It does not provide enough information for an AI agent to use the tool correctly, making it an instance of under-specification rather than conciseness.

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 Frida ecosystem with many sibling tools, no annotations, no output schema, and two un-described parameters, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to provide essential context about how to construct a request, what the response is, or how it relates to other service operations.

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?

The description does not explain any of the parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the input schema, which itself has no descriptions. With 0% schema coverage, the description should clarify the purpose and format of 'service_id' and 'params_json', but it does not.

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 states the verb 'send a request' and the resource 'open device service', providing a general purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what the request does, what a service is, and does not differentiate from the sibling 'frida_service_request' which likely performs a similar action without an ID.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other service-related tools. Prerequisites like requiring an open service are only implied by the phrase 'open device service'. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references.

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