cancel_task

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive, but the description adds critical nuance: 'Whatever the task had already done externally is not undone.' This explains the non-rollback nature beyond the mere destructive hint, and clarifies that it only stops further work on a running task.

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 long, with the main action in the first sentence and the critical caveat in the second. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it identifies the target (running task), the action (cancel), and the key side effect (no rollback). It doesn't address error handling, but that's not needed given the low complexity and existing annotations/output schema.

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 has no description for task_id (0% coverage), yet the description doesn't explicitly mention it either. The implication is clear ('a running Hermes task' corresponds to task_id), but for such a low schema coverage, the description should compensate by defining the parameter more explicitly.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Cancel a running Hermes task.' This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from read-only siblings like get_task and list_tasks. The additional detail about not rolling back further clarifies its scope.

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 does not explicitly compare this tool to alternatives such as stop or restart. It provides context about the tool's effect ('stops further work, it does not roll back') but no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives, leaving usage somewhat implied.

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