continue_execution

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

The description thoroughly explains the long-poll pattern, blocking behavior, and the state changes. It adds significant context beyond the minimal annotation (openWorldHint=false), covering the response contents and the danger of calling state-reading tools during execution.

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 well-organized and front-loaded with key information. It is efficient but slightly verbose in the middle section.

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 description covers preconditions, behavior, response, and important caveats. It does not mention timeout or error handling, but given the complexity, it is fairly complete.

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 schema has 0% coverage for the only parameter (thread_id). The description does not explain what thread_id means or how to use it, leaving the agent with no guidance on this optional parameter.

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 continues program execution and blocks until the program stops again. It distinguishes itself from stepping tools (step_into, step_over) which perform single steps, and from other execution control tools like restart_debug or stop_debug.

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?

It specifies the precondition 'State: STOPPED required' and warns against calling get_variables or get_call_stack while waiting. It provides guidance on when to use (when resuming execution) and what not to do, but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or mention when to avoid.

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