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

Adds value beyond annotations by explaining that only pending tasks can be cancelled and that completed tasks cannot be undone. Reinforces idempotent and destructive hints with concrete examples. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences plus a tier note, all essential. Front-loaded with the main action, followed by constraints and idempotency. No wasted words.

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?

Given the simple tool (one parameter, good annotations, output schema present), the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use, constraints (pending only), idempotency, and tier. Sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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% and the schema already describes the parameter. The description adds minimal extra context by mentioning the id source ('from schedule_task or list_scheduled_tasks'), which is helpful but not essential.

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 tool cancels a pending scheduled task by id, specifying the verb 'Cancel' and the resource 'pending scheduled task'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'schedule_task' and 'list_scheduled_tasks' by mentioning where the id comes from.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: only for pending tasks, not for completed ones. Also notes idempotency (cancelling an already-cancelled task is a no-op) and a tier restriction (sp500+ sample rejected), providing clear guidance on usage context.

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