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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral traits: nothing is published, staged bytes are cleaned up, and the timeout context (15 minutes). This goes beyond the structured fields and gives the agent a clear picture of side effects.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and a parameter hint. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure is optimal for quick parsing.

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 two-parameter operation with no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use it, and the specific parameter nuance. The timeout context adds operational completeness, and nothing an agent needs 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.

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already described. The description adds value by explicitly tying batchId to start_upload/start_revision and clarifying when to pass previewId ('Pass previewId for a preview batch'), which is slightly more specific than the schema's 'Set when aborting a preview upload batch'.

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 action (abort), the resource (pending batch from start_upload or start_revision), and the effect (nothing published, staged bytes cleaned up). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the source of the batch and mentioning previewId for preview batches.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use when an upload went wrong instead of leaving the batch to time out (15 minutes).' It also clarifies the alternative (letting it time out) and the parameter condition for preview batches, leaving no ambiguity about selection.

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