replay_resume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool generates a resume brief to paste into a new session, implying no destructive side effects. However, it does not explain whether the tool modifies state, what format the output is in, or any prerequisites (e.g., must the session be active?). These are acceptable gaps given the tool's simplicity and read-only nature.

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 with two clauses, totalling 23 words. It is concise and front-loaded with the action. No wasted words. Could be slightly more structured by separating the instruction from the default behavior, but it remains effective.

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?

The tool has a single optional parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, so complexity is low. The description explains the tool's purpose (generate resume brief) and its intended use (paste into new session). It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly. A small gap: it does not specify the output format or length.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by stating the default behavior ('default: the most recent') beyond the schema's 'Session ID (default: most recent)'. This is helpful but not extensive, as the single parameter is well-documented.

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 a specific verb ('Generate') and noun ('resume brief') and clarifies the default behavior (most recent session). The action and purpose are unmistakably clear, distinguishing it from sibling tools that check status, create checkpoints, list sessions, etc.

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?

The description explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: to continue work in a new Claude Code session. It implies the alternative is manual copy-paste or other workflow, and provides a clear use case. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternative sibling tools for exclusion.

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