Repository navigation
Follow-up behavior: add a "steer at next tool call" mode #15287
Replies: 4 comments
|
Moving this over from #24399, which was closed as a duplicate of this discussion. A data point for ACP providers, where this gap is wider than for T3's native Claude or Codex providers. T3's current ACP integration declares no active steering, so for ACP Registry agents Steer cancels the prompt and starts a new one. (Some ACP adapters offer their own extension for this, such as For providers without a supported non-interrupting route, T3 does control one safe boundary: the result of a call to its own
Limits: delivery only happens when the agent calls a T3 tool, so this makes in-turn delivery possible, not guaranteed, and the UI would have to say "delivered at the next T3 tool call", not "steered". It also depends on the T3 tools being available to the agent and the agent using them. A fork has an implementation of this, tested against a simulated provider; I haven't measured how often real agents pick up messages through it. I'm not proposing it as a fix for the whole discussion, only as a possible delivery mechanism for providers that can't take input mid-turn. If maintainers want to explore it, I can write it up as a separate proposal. — Opus 5.5 with Claude Code, reviewed by GPT 6.1 Sol |
|
+1. A data point on why today's Steer isn't a substitute, from T3 Code 0.1.6 with Claude Opus 5.5 (Claude Code 2.1.316). The agent had issued two calls: a long A "steer at the next tool call" mode would avoid this. Every call the agent has already issued runs to completion, and the message is delivered before the next model request, in the same turn, like Enter in the Claude Code CLI. With nothing cancelled, the agent has no refusal to misread and carries on with its task unless the message tells it otherwise. The SDK experiments in #21895 suggest Claude's |
|
+1. Most of my mid-run messages aren't corrections. They're extra context: a constraint I just remembered, a file the agent should look at, or a thought about the approach. I want the agent to read it at its next tool boundary and keep going. Today I have to pick between Steer and Queue. Steer can cancel the calls in flight and makes the agent think I stopped it (#21895). Queue holds the note until the turn ends, often after the agent has already gone the wrong way. So I either sit on the thought or stop the run myself. A "steer at next tool call" mode covers this. I'd also like it as the default for Enter, with the interrupting Steer kept for the modifier key. That matches the Claude Code CLI, where Enter delivers after the running tool calls and Esc interrupts. |
|
+1. My mid-run messages are a mix of extra context and corrections, with extra context a bit more common. Claude Code handles this more smoothly. Its docs say Enter delivers my message as soon as the running tool calls finish, in the same turn. When I want it in right away, I've also had a steer make Claude drop my original request, the same way as guryanov-a's case above. I asked it to prepare a new release. While one Bash command was running with a |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Current modes
Why I'd like it kept as its own mode
Before V2, Queue sent a message after the next completed tool call (#11673, reported as a bug in #12100). I found that timing useful, and it matches how Claude Code handles mid-turn input.
Steer sends right away regardless of what the agent is doing, and Queue can't redirect the agent until the whole turn ends. Delivering at the next tool call sits between the two.
Proposal
Add a "Steer at next tool call" option to Follow-up behavior. It brings back the pre-V2 Queue behavior (V1 builds, 0.0.42–0.0.45). The Queue and Steer defaults stay unchanged.
Related
#6684 · #12100 · #14065
All reactions