sailfish_android_build_cancelCancel a remote Android/AppSupport build by verifying its process identity first, ensuring only the intended job is stopped.
Cancel a remote Android/AppSupport build after verifying its process identity.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | No | Configured build host alias or ssh target. | |
| job_id | Yes | ||
| timeout | No | Command timeout in seconds. | |
| state_dir | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, openWorld. The description adds one meaningful behavioral fact — identity verification before cancelling — which explains why a stale job_id may fail. It omits auth/SSH requirements, what happens to partially built artifacts, and the effect of the timeout, so it only modestly exceeds the annotation floor.
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?
A single tight sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though arguably too terse given the gaps it leaves unfilled.
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?
A mutation tool with no output schema, 50% parameter coverage and a required job_id that is undocumented in both schema and description. The agent lacks enough to reliably construct a call or predict failure modes.
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 coverage is only 50%: host and timeout are documented, but job_id (the sole required parameter) and state_dir have no descriptions anywhere. The description does not compensate by explaining job_id format, how it is obtained, or the purpose of state_dir.
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?
Specific verb (Cancel) plus qualified resource (remote Android/AppSupport build), which is more precise than the title alone. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling sailfish_build_cancel, so an agent must infer the Android/AppSupport scope is the differentiator.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With two nearly identical cancel siblings (sailfish_build_cancel, sailfish_android_build_cancel) and a status sibling, the description should tell the agent which cancel path applies and whether a build must be in progress.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.