bob_resume_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'auto_edit approval' as a key behavior but does not explain the consequences (e.g., potential file modifications, destructive actions, or permission requirements). This is insufficient for a tool that likely mutates state.

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 that is front-loaded and free of filler. It efficiently conveys the core action and a key modifier (auto_edit approval), making it highly concise.

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 the tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, a one-sentence description is inadequate. It omits behavioral implications, return value expectations, and any guidance on the optional parameters, leaving too much uncertainty for an agent to use it correctly.

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 only 29%, so the description must compensate, but it does not. It only implies the roles of session and prompt without adding detail on mode, model, stdin, workspace, or include_directories. The mention of 'previous' and 'new' adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Resume a previous Bob Shell session') and adds the unique action of running a new prompt with auto_edit approval. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like bob_prompt (new sessions) and bob_list_sessions (listing).

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 implies when to use the tool (when resuming a session) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. The use case is clear from context, but no exclusions or alternative names are given.

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