cloud_cancel

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

The clause 'no deshace los elementos ya copiados' is genuinely useful partial-effect disclosure that complements the annotations (destructiveHint=false) by explaining what remains after cancellation. However, it does not explain whether cancellation is immediate, whether it needs elevated permissions, or what state the job ends in.

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 compact sentence, front-loaded with the action and followed by the consequence. No filler, though it is arguably under-specified rather than merely concise.

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 job-control tool with no output schema and no annotation detail beyond hints, the description omits how to obtain the job_id, whether the cancellation is terminal, and how it relates to cloud_pause/cloud_resume. What is present is accurate but far from complete.

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 single parameter job_id is undocumented in both schema and description. The description never indicates where a job_id comes from (e.g., from cloud_jobs), so the agent gets no help beyond the property 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?

The verb is clear ('Cancela') but the resource is vague ('un proceso') — it never says this cancels a cloud job, nor how it differs from sibling cloud_pause, which also acts on running jobs. An agent can infer the intent but must guess the target domain.

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 guidance and no identification of alternatives such as cloud_pause (suspend) vs cloud_cancel (stop permanently). The agent is left to infer the distinction from the sibling names alone.

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