cancel_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It does not mention whether cancellation is irreversible, whether it only applies to pending posts, or what happens to the post after cancellation. The lack of such details leaves behavioral expectations unclear.

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 a single, focused sentence that immediately states the core action and operand. It wastes no words and is appropriately front-loaded.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description is minimal and does not explain the effects, success criteria, or any limitations. Given its mutating nature, the lack of contextual detail leaves the description incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the post_id parameter, so the description adds no new semantic value. It repeats 'by ID' without adding format, source, or validation details, but since the schema is complete, baseline 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 action (cancel) and the resource (a pending scheduled post), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like schedule_post and publish_now. The verb is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It only states the basic function, leaving the agent to infer when cancellation is appropriate.

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