Cancel, pause, or resume a job

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

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive, so the description's added value is the nuance that only 'cancel' is terminal while pause/resume are non-terminal, plus the confirmation workflow. This adds behavioral context beyond what annotations and schema provide.

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?

Two sentences carry all essential information with no filler. The action verbs and terminal distinction are front-loaded, and the confirmation guidance is placed exactly where it applies.

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 three-parameter mutation with a destructiveHint annotation, the description is nearly complete: it covers all operations, the confirmation requirement, and the irreversible nature of cancel. It could be more complete by referencing how to obtain the named job id or what to do when the job isn't found, but these are minor for this tool.

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?

With schema_description_coverage at 0%, the description compensates by explaining job_id as 'named job', clarifying the action enum's semantics (terminal cancel, pause, resume), and stating when confirm should be true. It doesn't specify what confirm=false does, but it still covers the key parameters meaningfully.

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 names a specific action set ('Cancel, pause, or resume') and the resource ('named job id'), and distinguishes cancel as terminal versus pause/resume as reversible. This clearly separates it from scheduling siblings like x_ads_schedule_create and x_ads_schedule_list.

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 implies this tool is for controlling an existing scheduled job and provides a concrete usage condition ('confirm=true after the user named the job'). However, it never explicitly contrasts with alternatives such as creating a job or listing jobs, leaving selection somewhat to inference.

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