Cancel Grok Job

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by explicitly stating that cancellation includes the child process tree, which clarifies the destructive scope. It aligns with destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, adding specific behavioral detail without contradicting 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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and includes the key effect. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the key destructive effect (child process tree). It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly, though it lacks explicit mention of using grok_list to discover job IDs.

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 only indirectly references the job_id through 'one known', but it does not explain where to obtain it or any additional constraints. The schema already provides UUID format, so the description adds minimal semantic value beyond that.

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 uses a specific verb 'Cancel' and identifies the resource 'one known Grok Bridge background job and its child process tree', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like grok_start, grok_poll, and grok_list. It explains both the action and the scope.

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 usage when a known job ID exists and you want to cancel it, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., use grok_list to find job IDs) or when not to use it. The phrase 'one known' hints at a prerequisite but provides no direct guidance.

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