Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Elicitly Pro

by ai.elicitly
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Cancel a pending elicitation

elicit_cancel
Destructive

Withdraw a pending elicitation you created — the plan changed or the request is superseded. The request resolves canceled: a terminal status distinct from declined (the reviewer's explicit no) and expired (nobody decided in time). The review page stops accepting decisions, pending elicit_await calls wake, and elicit_result has no outcome to fetch. Errors if the request was already decided or has expired; a cancel racing a concurrent decision loses cleanly to whichever landed first.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
elicitationIdYesThe `elicitationId` returned by the creating tool (elicit_approval, elicit_selection, or elicit_proposal).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesThe request is now terminally canceled.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -falseNew value: +{}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / elicitationId / description
      Added value: +"The `elicitationId` returned by the creating tool (elicit_approval, elicit_selection, or elicit_proposal)."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "status": {
+      "const": "canceled",
+      "description": "The request is now terminally canceled.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=false. The description adds substantial context beyond that: the resulting terminal state, that the review page stops accepting decisions, that pending `elicit_await` calls wake, that `elicit_result` has no outcome, the error conditions, and the concurrent-decision race behavior. This is exceptional disclosure for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with verb+resource, then consequence, then edge cases and race semantics. Every sentence carries distinct operational information with no restatement of the name or title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be spelled out, yet the description still tells the agent what happens downstream (elicit_result has no outcome). For a one-parameter mutation tool, nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so `elicitationId` is already fully documented, and the baseline is 3. The phrase 'you created' hints at an ownership constraint not stated in the schema, but no format, length, or lookup guidance is added, so this remains at the schema-driven baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Withdraw a pending elicitation you created') and immediately disambiguates the resulting terminal status from the sibling concepts `declined` and `expired`. An agent can distinguish this from elicit_status, elicit_result, or elicit_await purely from the description.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear when-to-use motivation ('the plan changed or the request is superseded') and explicit when-not conditions ('Errors if the request was already decided or has expired'). It stops short of routing the agent to a sibling tool for the alternative cases, so it is clear context rather than full alternative-selection guidance.

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

All Elicitly Pro toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources