agents_resume

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool creates 'a new asynchronous task' and warns against injecting into an open interactive TUI session, which are key behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects on the original session or permission requirements, but the primary operational behavior is clearly stated.

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 exactly two sentences: one stating the purpose and one providing a critical exclusion. It is front-loaded with the core verb and resource, with no wasted words.

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 tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It omits parameter semantics, behavior on failure, and how to track or wait for the resulting asynchronous task, which are essential for correct invocation.

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 schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, yet the description only clarifies that session_id refers to a completed CLI agent session. The other parameters (provider, prompt, work_dir, model, permission, timeout_seconds, isolated_worktree) are left unexplained, so the description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 specific verb 'resume' targeting 'a completed CLI agent session' with the outcome 'as a new asynchronous task.' It also explicitly warns against using it with open interactive TUI sessions, which distinguishes it from other session-management tools.

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?

It clearly states the tool is for resuming completed sessions and provides a strong when-not-to-use rule: 'Never use this to inject into a session still open in an interactive TUI.' However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool to use for open sessions or for new sessions, only implying these are outside its scope.

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