cancel_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Request cancellation,' which implies an action but does not state side effects (e.g., whether the job is permanently terminated, whether it is reversible, or what happens to the revision). This is a significant gap for a potentially destructive operation.

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 with no wasted words, and the core action is front-loaded. However, it is under-specified rather than concisely complete, so it scores slightly below 5.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimal but does not provide enough context for an agent to decide when to call it. It lacks information about the meaning of 'current revision' and the expected outcome, leaving the tool insufficiently documented.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not explain the meaning or format of the 'revision' parameter. An agent cannot infer what value to provide or how it relates to the cancellation.

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 states a specific verb ('cancel') and a resource ('current revision'), which clearly indicates the action. However, 'current revision' is ambiguous without additional context, and there is no explicit differentiation from sibling tools, though cancellation is a distinct operation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites such as checking job status first. The description does not mention any conditions that should trigger cancellation or any prior checks needed.

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