replay_resume

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without needing repetition. The description adds the 'default: most recent' behavior and the workflow advice about pasting, but that overlaps with parameter schema and usage guidance rather than exposing new behavioral traits. No contradictions with annotations.

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 only two sentences long and front-loads the main purpose. The second sentence adds immediate practical guidance without fluff, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 just one optional parameter and no output schema, and the description still explains the invocation default and how to use the result. It does not account for edge cases like no existing session or the exact format of the brief, but these are not essential for an agent to correctly call and consume the output.

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%, with session_id already described as 'Session ID (default: most recent)'. The tool description essentially restates the default without adding semantic detail on format or session selection logic. Given high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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' with a specific resource 'structured resume brief' and states a default behavior ('most recent'), so the core purpose is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like replay_checkpoint or replay_status, which prevents a 5.

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 gives an explicit use case: 'Paste the result into a new Claude Code session to continue where it left off.' This provides clear context for when this tool should be used. It does not, however, exclude any alternatives or state which sibling tools should be used instead, so it falls short of a 5.

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