tenki_cancel_template_build

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

Annotations already convey that this is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive-hinted. The description adds the useful 'in-progress' precondition but does not disclose side effects such as whether cancellation is reversible or how completed builds are handled. This is acceptable given annotation coverage, but it leaves some behavioral detail implicit.

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?

A single sentence with no wasted words: the verb is front-loaded, the object is specific, and the precondition is included. Every part earns its place.

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 one-parameter cancellation tool with annotations present, the description gives enough to select and invoke it correctly: what to cancel and how to identify it. It does not describe post-cancel behavior or error cases, but those are not essential for calling 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?

The schema covers the only parameter with a description ('The template build ID to cancel.'), so baseline 3 applies. The tool description merely restates that the cancellation happens 'by its build ID' without adding format, source, or validity guidance beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Cancel') with a clear resource ('template build') and the required identifier ('build ID'). The qualifier 'in-progress' distinguishes this from get/list/build template operations in the sibling list, so an agent can tell what it does at a glance.

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 clearly scopes usage to 'in-progress' template builds, which tells the agent when the tool applies. It does not explicitly route to alternatives like tenki_get_template_build or tenki_list_active_template_builds, but the context is clear enough for a simple cancellation operation.

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