cc_send_instruction

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, safety, blocking behavior, or what happens if the session isn't started. This is insufficient for an agent to infer usage safely.

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, short and direct. It has no wasted words, but it is not structured with bullet points or separate sections. It is appropriately concise for the given information.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the nature of the instructions, return values, or error conditions. It is not complete enough for an agent to use effectively without additional context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any parameter semantics. For example, 'allow_frontmost' and 'session_id' are not clarified. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema field names.

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 sends natural language task instructions to a started managed CLI session. It uses a specific verb ('send') and resource ('natural language task instructions' to a 'started managed CLI session'), distinguishing it from siblings like cc_send_decision and cc_send_slash_command.

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 the tool is for sending instructions to an already started session, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like cc_start_session or cc_send_slash_command. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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