cancel_deletion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the main effects (cancel, release, invalidate) but does not discuss idempotency, prerequisites (e.g., token validity), or side effects (e.g., what if already confirmed?). Basic behavioral context is present but incomplete.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the primary action ('Cancel a staged deletion'). Every sentence adds value.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the operation, its effect, and the key entity (confirmation token). No gaps remain.

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 100% with a clear parameter description. The tool description adds value by specifying that the token comes from batch_delete_work_items, linking the parameter to its source. This extra context improves understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 staged deletion, releases items from the confirmation queue, and invalidates the token. It uses specific verbs ('Cancel', 'release', 'invalidate') and resource ('staged deletion', 'confirmation queue'), distinguishing it from siblings like batch_delete_work_items (stages) and confirm_deletion (confirms).

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 after staging and before confirming deletion, but does not explicitly state when to use or not use alternatives. It mentions the token comes from batch_delete_work_items, linking to a sibling, but lacks explicit exclusions or when-not guidance.

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