frida_device_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that the tool likely requires a USB connection or network access to a device, nor does it state safety (e.g., read-only operation) or any side effects. The agent cannot infer these traits.

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?

Extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a clean parameter list. No extraneous information, front-loaded with the core action.

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?

For a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not describe the return value format (e.g., device properties like name, model, OS) which would help the agent interpret results.

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 adds meaning beyond the input schema by listing valid values for device_type ('usb', 'local', or 'remote') and clarifying device_id as 'Specific device ID (optional)'. Schema coverage is 0%, so this compensation is valuable, though not exhaustive.

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 'Get detailed info about a Frida device' with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Frida device'). It distinguishes from siblings like frida_list_devices (list devices) and frida_list_processes (list processes) by focusing on detailed info for a single device.

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 vs alternatives like frida_list_devices or frida_find_process. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or compare with similar tools.

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