oci_kafka_cancel_work_request

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden; it discloses write nature and cancellation constraints, though lacks details on outcome (e.g., status change) or idempotency.

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?

Very concise: three sentences plus args, front-loaded with action and constraints, 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?

Complete for a single-param cancellation tool with output schema; covers purpose, usage constraints, and parameter. Could optionally mention error handling or idempotency.

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 0%, but description explains param 'work_request_id' is an OCID for the work request to cancel, adding value beyond the schema's title.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Cancel' and resource 'in-progress OCI work request', distinguishing from sibling tools like get_work_request or list_work_requests.

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 specifies when to use (only in-progress requests) and when not to (completed/failed), and mentions prerequisite --allow-writes.

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