cancel_sdg_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that resources detach at the next safe point, indicating asynchronous/delayed cancellation behavior. However, it does not clarify the default preview=true behavior, what side effects a real cancellation has, or whether execution is reversible.

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 and front-loaded, with no filler. The key distinction (preview vs. request) appears first, followed by the important async behavior.

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 cancellation tool with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, this description is under-specified. It omits the meaning of the preview flag, the role of command_id and idempotency_key, and does not explain what the output or actual cancellation entails.

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 provides no information about job_id, preview, command_id, or idempotency_key. An agent must guess which parameters control the preview-versus-execute behavior and how idempotency works.

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 states a clear action ('Preview or request cancellation') on an identifiable resource (SDG job, via the tool name). It conveys the core purpose and the unusual preview capability. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling cancel_job tool beyond the name itself.

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 phrase 'Preview or request cancellation' implies a preview-then-execute workflow, which offers some usage guidance. It does not explain when to prefer this tool over cancel_job or delete_sdg_job, and no when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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