gitlab_cancel_job

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

No annotations exist, so description must fully disclose behavior. It says 'cancel' but omits consequences (e.g., job becomes canceled state, pipeline impact, permissions needed, irreversibility). Inadequate 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?

Description is short and front-loaded with purpose. The Args section is clear, though not overly structured. No superfluous text.

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 low schema coverage and no annotations, description should provide more context: return values, preconditions (e.g., job must be running), errors (e.g., cannot cancel already finished job). Output schema exists but description doesn't reference it.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description adds meaning: explains job_id as 'numeric job ID to cancel' and project_path as 'GitLab project path'. This compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Cancel a running CI job', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like gitlab_retry_job (retry) and gitlab_get_job (read).

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?

Description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, such as when a job is stuck or when cancellation is allowed. It only states the action, leaving usage context inferred.

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