cassette_cancel_job

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'cooperative cancellation' without explaining side effects, prerequisites, or error states, leaving significant ambiguity about how the tool behaves.

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 sentence of only 9 words, which is concise but sacrifices necessary detail. It avoids fluff but is notably underspecified for safe tool use.

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 lack of annotations and ambiguous description, the tool description is insufficiently complete. An output schema exists but is not shown in the description, and crucial context about cooperative cancellation behavior 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?

The sole parameter 'job_id' has 0% schema coverage (no description), and the tool description adds no additional meaning or guidance about the format or constraints of the job ID.

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 ('persisted Cassette job'), and the purpose is easily distinguished from sibling tools like 'cassette_run_job' or 'cassette_job_status'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., whether cancellation is only for running jobs, or if it can be used on completed ones), and no explicit when-not-to-use instructions.

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