App Install Cancel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose one important trait — that this is a write operation (写操作) — but says nothing about reversibility, required permissions, whether the task_id must reference an active install, or what happens on an invalid/expired task id.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the operation and its mutating nature are stated immediately.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the 5 parameters are fully described in the schema. However, for a mutation tool with no annotations, the description is thin on safety/permission context and gives no routing guidance among the several cancel siblings.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter including the required task_id is already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning (formats, defaults, constraints), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (取消/cancel) and resource (应用安装任务/app install task), so the agent knows exactly what operation is performed. It does not differentiate itself from closely named siblings like app_task_cancel, app_update_cancel, or app_download_cancel, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. an in-progress install task must exist), and no indication of when to prefer app_task_cancel, app_update_cancel, or app_download_cancel instead. The agent must infer the correct tool purely from the name.

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