Claude's 'Think' Tool: Using Explicit Reasoning Blocks in AI Agents

What Is the Think Tool and Why Does It Matter?

When building AI agents that chain multiple tool calls, one of the most persistent failure modes is the model making premature decisions. It reads partial information, picks the first plausible action, and only realizes the mistake three steps later. Claude's think tool addresses this by giving the model a dedicated space to reason before acting.

The think tool is not the same as extended thinking (the thinking budget feature). Extended thinking happens automatically at the start of a response and is controlled via the thinking parameter. The think tool, by contrast, is a tool the model can invoke at any point during an agentic loop to pause and reason explicitly between tool calls.

Extended Thinking vs. The Think Tool

Feature	Extended Thinking	Think Tool
When it fires	Start of each response turn	Any point during agentic loop
Control mechanism	thinking.budget_tokens parameter	Tool definition in tools array
Use case	Complex initial reasoning	Mid-workflow deliberation
Visibility	Thinking blocks in response	Tool call + result in conversation
Token cost	Counts toward thinking budget	Counts as regular tool use tokens

The key insight is that in multi-turn agentic workflows, the model needs to reason not just at the beginning of its first response, but repeatedly throughout a long task as new information arrives from tool results.

Implementing the Think Tool

The think tool is remarkably simple to define. You add it as a tool in your API request, and Claude will call it when it needs to deliberate.

import anthropic

client = anthropic.Anthropic()

# Define the think tool alongside your other tools
tools = [
    {
        "name": "think",
        "description": (
            "Use this tool to think through complex problems step-by-step. "
            "Call this tool when you need to analyze information from previous "
            "tool results, plan your next actions, or reason about edge cases "
            "before making a decision. Your thinking will not be shown to the user."
        ),
        "input_schema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "reasoning": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "Your step-by-step reasoning about the current situation."
                }
            },
            "required": ["reasoning"]
        }
    },
    {
        "name": "search_codebase",
        "description": "Search for files matching a pattern in the codebase.",
        "input_schema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "query": {"type": "string"},
                "file_pattern": {"type": "string"}
            },
            "required": ["query"]
        }
    },
    {
        "name": "edit_file",
        "description": "Apply an edit to a file.",
        "input_schema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "path": {"type": "string"},
                "old_text": {"type": "string"},
                "new_text": {"type": "string"}
            },
            "required": ["path", "old_text", "new_text"]
        }
    }
]

Processing Think Tool Calls in Your Agent Loop

When Claude invokes the think tool, you simply return an acknowledgment. The value is in the reasoning the model wrote, not in any external action.

def run_agent_loop(messages: list, tools: list) -> str:
    """Run the agentic loop with think tool support."""
    while True:
        response = client.messages.create(
            model="claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
            max_tokens=8096,
            tools=tools,
            messages=messages
        )

        # Check if we are done
        if response.stop_reason == "end_turn":
            # Extract final text response
            for block in response.content:
                if hasattr(block, "text"):
                    return block.text
            return ""

        # Process tool calls
        tool_results = []
        for block in response.content:
            if block.type == "tool_use":
                if block.name == "think":
                    # Think tool: just acknowledge it
                    # The reasoning is captured in block.input["reasoning"]
                    tool_results.append({
                        "type": "tool_result",
                        "tool_use_id": block.id,
                        "content": "Thinking complete. Proceed with your next action."
                    })
                else:
                    # Execute real tools
                    result = execute_tool(block.name, block.input)
                    tool_results.append({
                        "type": "tool_result",
                        "tool_use_id": block.id,
                        "content": result
                    })

        # Append assistant response and tool results
        messages.append({"role": "assistant", "content": response.content})
        messages.append({"role": "user", "content": tool_results})

When Does the Think Tool Improve Performance?

Based on benchmarks and real-world usage, the think tool provides measurable improvements in three specific scenarios.

1. Multi-Step Tool Use with Dependencies

When the output of one tool call determines which tool to call next, the model benefits from pausing to analyze intermediate results.

Example pattern: An agent that searches a codebase, reads a file, then decides what edit to make. Without the think tool, the model sometimes edits based on assumptions from the search results alone, without fully processing the file contents.

Measured improvement: In internal evaluations of coding agents, adding the think tool reduced incorrect edits by 30-40% on tasks requiring three or more sequential tool calls.

2. Policy-Heavy Decision Making

When the agent must evaluate a user request against multiple constraints or business rules, explicit reasoning prevents the model from satisfying one constraint while violating another.

# System prompt that benefits from think tool usage
system_prompt = """You are a customer service agent for an insurance company.
Before taking any action, use the think tool to verify:
1. The customer's identity has been confirmed
2. The requested change is within policy limits
3. The change does not require supervisor approval
4. All regulatory disclosure requirements are met

Only proceed with the action after confirming all four conditions."""

3. Ambiguous or Conflicting Information

When tool results contain contradictory data or when the user's request is ambiguous, the think tool gives the model space to resolve the ambiguity explicitly rather than picking an interpretation silently.

Combining Think Tool with Extended Thinking

You can use both features simultaneously. Extended thinking handles the initial planning phase, while the think tool handles mid-execution deliberation.

response = client.messages.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
    max_tokens=16000,
    thinking={
        "type": "enabled",
        "budget_tokens": 5000  # For initial reasoning
    },
    tools=tools,  # Includes think tool for mid-loop reasoning
    messages=messages
)

When to use which:

• Extended thinking only: Single-turn complex problems (math, analysis, code generation)
• Think tool only: Multi-turn agentic workflows where mid-loop reasoning matters most
• Both together: High-stakes agentic tasks where both initial planning and ongoing deliberation are critical

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Over-specifying when to think: If your system prompt says "use the think tool before every action," the model will think even when the next step is obvious, wasting tokens and adding latency.

Using think tool as a scratchpad for computation: The think tool is for reasoning about what to do, not for performing calculations. If you need computation, use a code execution tool.

Ignoring the reasoning content: While you return a simple acknowledgment, you should log the think tool's reasoning content. It is invaluable for debugging agent behavior and understanding why the agent made specific decisions.

if block.name == "think":
    reasoning = block.input["reasoning"]
    logger.info(f"Agent reasoning: {reasoning}")
    # Store for debugging and evaluation
    reasoning_trace.append({
        "step": step_count,
        "reasoning": reasoning,
        "timestamp": datetime.utcnow().isoformat()
    })

Real-World Impact: Metrics from Production Agents

Teams deploying the think tool in production coding assistants and customer service agents have reported consistent improvements.

• Task completion rate: 12-18% improvement on multi-step tasks
• Tool call efficiency: 15% fewer unnecessary or redundant tool calls
• Error recovery: 25% improvement in the agent's ability to self-correct after receiving unexpected tool results
• User satisfaction: 8-10% increase in user ratings for agent helpfulness

The think tool is not a silver bullet. For simple, single-tool tasks, it adds latency without benefit. But for any agent that chains three or more tool calls with decision points between them, it is one of the highest-impact improvements available today.

Summary

The think tool fills a critical gap in agentic AI: the ability to reason deliberately between actions. Extended thinking handles upfront planning, but agents need to think on their feet as new information arrives. By adding a simple tool definition and processing it in your agent loop, you give Claude the space to make better decisions throughout complex workflows. The implementation cost is minimal, but the impact on multi-step task accuracy is substantial.