cancel_queue_item

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden but only says 'Cancel', which implies mutation/destructive action. It does not disclose whether the action is reversible, any permission requirements, or side effects on the build state.

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?

One sentence, directly front-loaded with the action and object. No wasted words or redundant information.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, so the description is nearly sufficient. However, it could be more complete by explicitly contrasting with stop_build to avoid ambiguity in sibling selection.

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 merely restates the parameter name ('queue item id') without adding semantics beyond the schema's 'item_id' field. It does not explain how to obtain the ID or any format requirements, failing to compensate for 0% schema description coverage.

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 (queued build) with a specific identifier (queue item id). It distinguishes from siblings like stop_build and list_queue by specifying 'queued build'.

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 queued builds but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over stop_build or list_queue. No alternatives or exclusion criteria are mentioned, leaving the decision to the agent.

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