codex_job_cancel

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds critical behavioral details: graceful shutdown, force-kill timeout, worktree cleanup warnings, and non-resumability. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Five sentences, no filler, front-loaded with main purpose. Each sentence provides distinct information: cancellation action, graceful shutdown, idempotency, cleanup, and cost.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: idempotency, failure behavior (cleanup_warnings), terminal state handling, and parameter recovery. With an output schema present, return values need not be described. Complete for a cancellation 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description enhances by advising how to recover lost job_ids via codex_job_list and explaining workspace_root fallback behavior with meta.workspace_warning. Adds value beyond schema.

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 'Cancel a running background Codex job' with specific verb (cancel) and resource (running background job). Distinguishes from sibling tools like codex_job_list and codex_job_status.

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?

Explains when to use (cancel running job), idempotency ('Already-terminal jobs are returned unchanged'), and consequences ('cancelled jobs cannot be resumed'). Also mentions 'Free — no model call.' Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but covers key usage guidance.

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