cancel_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the status change and return value, but does not mention reversibility, permissions, or side effects on related tasks or dependencies. This leaves significant behavioral unknowns for a mutation tool.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and includes only necessary details. No redundant text or filler.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the basic action and return. However, it lacks contextual guidance on tool selection and potential side effects, so it is not fully complete for real-world decision-making.

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 description explains task_id as 'ID of the task to cancel', which adds a minimal gloss over the schema's bare integer field. With 0% schema description coverage, this is helpful but lacks additional context like required format or constraints.

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 task and changes its status to CANCELED, which is specific and distinguishes it from delete_task or pause_task. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools, so it stops short of the highest clarity rating.

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 verb 'cancel' implies when to use the tool, and the status change to CANCELED hints at its intended use. Yet there is no explicit guidance on when to use cancel over pause, complete, or delete, especially with many relevant sibling tools.

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