claude_code_reply

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

The description discloses that the tool returns immediately and requires polling, adds nuance about diskResumeConfig, and aligns with annotations (destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true). It provides valuable behavioral context beyond the 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 concise (3 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds unique value. No redundancy or wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description sufficiently covers essential behavioral aspects and use cases. It is complete for an async tool with polling and conditional disk resume.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying when to use sessionId and diskResumeConfig, exceeding the schema's documentation.

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 a follow-up to an existing session, distinguishes it from starting a new session via 'claude_code', and references polling via 'claude_code_check'. It explicitly mentions reusing sessionId, making the verb and resource specific.

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 explicitly says to reuse sessionId instead of starting a new session, advises polling with claude_code_check, and specifies when to use diskResumeConfig. It provides clear context and exclusions for usage.

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