resume_session

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

Annotations are sparse (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that it is for recurring agents and returns session_id and re-attach instructions, but does not disclose potential side effects, error conditions, or whether it modifies session state. It states 'Free' but that is not behavioral.

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 three sentences: purpose, return information, motivation. No superfluous text. Highly concise and front-loaded.

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 6 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and incomplete annotations, the description is adequate but not exhaustive. It covers the core purpose but lacks error handling info (e.g., no prior session) and parameter interactions.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema, such as the nature of the return value. It does not elaborate on non-obvious parameters like lookback_days or recovery_token.

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 the tool resumes the most recent session for a stable agent_id, returning session_id and re-attach methods. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like close_session and quick_session by addressing a specific recurring agent need.

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 provides a clear use case: recurring agents avoiding re-emission of opening statements. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives like quick_session or start_therapy_session.

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