Paperform

Cancel document

cancel_document

DestructiveIdempotent

Cancel a document that is out for signature. Participants can no longer sign it and part-way progress is lost; it has to be re-sent as a new request. Confirm with the user before calling this. A draft cannot be cancelled.

Example: cancel_document({ id: "12:document:sd_2", reason: "Superseded" }) → { "cancelled": true, … }

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The document id.
`reason`	No	Optional note recorded with the cancellation. Participants may see it.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`record`	No
`cancelled`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description goes further by explaining the concrete consequence: participants can no longer sign, part-way progress is lost, and recovery requires resending as a new request. It also adds a human-confirmation requirement not captured by any annotation.

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?

Consequences and the confirmation requirement are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the example is compact and directly usable. No sentence is redundant.

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?

For a destructive two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and an output schema, everything an agent needs is present: what is destroyed, that it is unrecoverable, the draft exception, and the confirmation step. Return shape need not be explained further given the output schema and the example's abbreviated response.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the worked example adds real value by showing the expected id format ('12:document:sd_2') and pairing it with reason, which the schema only describes abstractly. Reason's visibility to participants is already in the schema, so that part earns no extra credit.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Cancel a document') plus a scope qualifier ('that is out for signature'), which separates it from siblings like delete, send_document, and update. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit preconditions: confirm with the user before calling, and a draft cannot be cancelled, plus the remedy path (re-send as a new request). It stops short of naming sibling alternatives such as delete for a draft, which leaves a small routing gap.

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

All Paperform tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?