Cancel GitLab job

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and non-read-only behavior. The description adds the constraint that only pending or running jobs can be cancelled, which is useful context beyond the annotation, but does not elaborate on side effects or permissions.

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, concise sentence with no redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource clearly.

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 simple destructive operation, the description covers the key state constraint. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values. However, it could mention permissions or the distinction from cancel_pipeline to be fully complete.

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 describes the project parameter but job_id lacks any description. The tool description does not compensate for this gap, leaving job_id semantics undefined. With only 50% schema coverage, the description should have provided more clarity.

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 or running GitLab CI job, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like retry_job and cancel_pipeline by focusing on the single job cancellation state.

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 implies usage for cancelling individual jobs but does not explicitly mention alternatives like cancel_pipeline or state when not to use it. No exclusions or when-not scenarios are provided.

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