Cancel Download

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key irreversible effect: the partial file is deleted and the in-flight MKV conversion is also aborted. It does not cover failure modes (invalid/already-finished job_id), auth requirements, or whether the deletion is recoverable.

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, no filler, with the destructive side effects front-loaded before the follow-up guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the destructive effects plus the post-call verification step. For a cancel/mutation tool, the remaining gap is idempotency and error behavior on non-running jobs.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it says nothing about job_id — not where to obtain it (presumably from list_downloads or download_status), nor its format. The parameter's meaning is only inferable from its 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?

States a specific verb and resource (cancel a running download) and adds scope that distinguishes it from siblings: it also aborts the MKV conversion and deletes the partial file. An agent can separate this from download_status, list_downloads and download_programme without inspecting any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to download_status for verification after calling ('Poll download_status to see it reach cancelled'), which names the correct alternative for status checks. It stops short of stating exclusions, e.g. what to do if the job already completed, was already cancelled, or the job_id is unknown.

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