cancel_execution

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains idempotency explicitly and details the three possible outcomes (marked cancelled, success with cancelled=false, fail). This goes beyond the idempotentHint annotation and provides crucial state-specific behavior.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, idempotency, and three behavioral outcomes. No redundant or extraneous information.

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?

The description sufficiently explains the tool's behavior for a cancellation action. It references execution ID, but could ideally mention that the execution ID comes from list_process_executions. However, given the output schema exists, return values are not required.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'execution ID' but does not add format or source details beyond the schema's 'a string that will be trimmed'. It does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 clearly states the tool's action (cancel) and resource (Huly Process execution), and distinguishes it from siblings like start_process, get_process, and list_process_executions. The verb 'cancel' is specific and the resource is well-defined.

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 implicitly tells when to use (to cancel an active execution) and describes outcomes for different states (active, already-cancelled, completed). It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the context is clear.

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