Cancel a previewed bulk operation

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: it states that nothing in the mailbox changes, that previews auto-expire after 15 minutes, and that cancelling records a decision instead of leaving it implicit. These details complement the idempotentHint and destructiveHint annotations and clarify that readOnlyHint=false is consistent with recording a decision.

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 concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence provides value: the consequence of cancellation, the single argument, the lack of side effects, and the expiry/recording nuance. No wasted words or redundant boilerplate.

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 tool with a single parameter, full schema coverage, and annotations that cover idempotency and destructiveness, the description fully specifies the scenario, the side-effect behavior, and the operational nuance. An agent has all the information needed to invoke it correctly; no output schema is necessary for such a simple declarative action.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the only parameter, plan_id, with a description ('The plan_id returned with a bulk preview') that is clear and self-sufficient. The description merely reinforces 'Takes only the plan_id,' adding singularity emphasis but no fundamentally new semantic meaning.

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 ('Decline'/'cancel') on a specific resource ('a previewed bulk delete or move') and the outcome ('so it can never run'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bulk_execute without naming it, by describing the opposite action.

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?

Usage is implied: this is the tool to call after previewing a bulk operation when you want to decline it rather than letting it expire. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, so the guidance is not as strong as it could be.

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