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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by clarifying that the operation does not affect subscription state or archive the customer, which are non-obvious side effects. This goes beyond the annotation hints.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core action. The first sentence repeats the title, but the second sentence adds the key scoping information efficiently. No wasted words or excessive detail.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with an output schema and safety annotations (idempotent, non-destructive), the description covers what the tool does and what it doesn't do. There are no prerequisites or complex behaviors that need further explanation. The output schema handles return values.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage of the single 'id' parameter with a clear description ('Unique numeric identifier for the customer'). The description does not add additional parameter syntax or format details, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Cancel' and the resource 'scheduled outreach for this customer', and explicitly distinguishes from archiving and subscription state changes. This differentiates it from sibling tools like archiveCustomer and unsubscribeCustomer without needing to open their schemas.

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?

It provides clear context by specifying that it does not archive or change subscription state, helping an agent decide when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or conditions for using them, so it stops short of full guidance.

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