alcove_task_cancel

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Cancel a task.' without mentioning side effects, permissions required, reversibility, or what happens to associated data. This is insufficient for the agent to understand the action's impact.

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 extremely concise (3 words), which is efficient but sacrifices necessary detail. It is front-loaded with the action but omits essential information that would earn 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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and a hidden output schema, the description is far from complete. It fails to explain parameter roles, output, or any contextual details needed for correct usage.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides no information about the three parameters (home, task_id, workspace), their formats, or how they affect cancellation. The required 'task_id' is not explained.

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 'Cancel a task.' clearly states the verb 'cancel' and the resource 'task'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'task_complete' and 'task_add', but could be more explicit about what cancellation entails (e.g., deletion vs status change).

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives like 'task_complete', nor does it mention prerequisites or context for cancellation.

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