cancel_job

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying that it terminates the worker process tree and only affects queued or running jobs. This provides concrete behavioral context beyond the annotation without contradiction.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. Every element adds value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 description is incomplete for effective use: it omits parameter guidance, does not clarify the difference from 'cancel_jobs', and provides no usage context. While the output schema exists, the description still fails to cover essential operational details.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'job_id' parameter at all. It fails to explain what the identifier represents, its format, or how to obtain it, leaving the agent to rely solely on the bare schema.

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') and resource ('a queued or running job'), and adds detail about the effect ('terminating the worker process tree'). It is clear and distinct from read tools, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'cancel_jobs' beyond the singular 'a job'.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the plural 'cancel_jobs' or other siblings. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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