cancel_scheduledCancel a scheduled social media post by providing its job ID to prevent it from being published.
Cancel a scheduled post by its job_id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| jobId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.11.1Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructiveHint: true, so the description doesn't need to restate that. It adds minimal context by specifying the identifier. No mention of whether cancellation is reversible or if there are side effects, but with destructiveHint present, a 3 is reasonable.
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?
One sentence, front-loaded with the action and the key parameter. No fluff, though it could specify the type of job_id (e.g., string) but that's in schema.
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 single-parameter action with destructive annotationable, the description is adequate. It doesn't explain return values, but output schema exists, so that's covered. Missing when to use and potential error cases, but given simplicity, average.
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 has 1 param with 0% description coverage)Skip. The description states that job_id is used to cancel, which adds the context that jobId is a job identifier, but it's already implicit in the param name. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the name.
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?
Clearly states it cancels a scheduled post, identified by job_id. The verb 'cancel' and resource 'scheduled post' are specific. Though similar to edit_scheduled, it distinguishes itself by the action of cancellation.
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 on when to use this versus edit_scheduled or retry_post. No mention of prerequisites like needing a valid job_id or that the post must be in scheduled state.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.