Manage Capacities upload job

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

Annotations mark the tool as destructive. The description adds valuable context: 'cancel aborts pending sessions while preserving already completed media objects.' It also clarifies that status is immediate and wait blocks up to timeoutSeconds, providing behavioral details beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every word earns its place. It efficiently explains the three actions without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description covers key behaviors and cancellation side effects. An output schema exists for return values, so not explaining them is acceptable. A minor gap is lack of guidance for invalid job IDs or already-terminal jobs, but overall it is complete.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters. The description reinforces the action semantics ('status is immediate, wait blocks...') but does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Manage' and identifies the resource as an 'in-process Capacities upload job returned by upload_files in background mode.' It enumerates the three actions (status, wait, cancel), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling content/upload tools.

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 states the tool is for managing jobs from upload_files in background mode, giving the context of when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the scope is well-defined and distinct from siblings.

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