Should FunctionCallContent derive from UserInputRequestContent?

[stephentoub]

If the intent of UserInputRequestContent is that it signals any content that the caller must respond to in a subsequent request, should FunctionCallContent derive from it? It currently doesn't.

cc: @westey-m

[westey-m]

I'm not sure that we should consider UserInputRequestContent as a call for all kinds of input. It is specifically "User" input, where user here means end user, not developer/caller. We could change it to be InputRequestContent though, which would be broader and in that case having FunctionCallContent derive from it as well would probably make sense.

[stephentoub]

We could change it to be InputRequestContent though

It does seem like we need some kind of indicator on content that it requires follow-up (and without said follow-up, subsequent requests will fail). I also think "user" is ambiguous and unnecessary.