Cancel command job

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds a small behavioral detail about force semantics. However, it does not explain the consequences of cancellation or what 'unconfirmed state' means, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the primary verb and resource. There is no wasted text, but the brevity borders on under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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 tool appears to target a generic 'unified job' system, but the description does not clarify how it differs from codex-specific tools like cancel_codex_job. Given the simple schema and annotations, more context about the force parameter and the job lifecycle is expected.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for both parameters. It provides a partial explanation for 'force' (releasing unconfirmed state) but gives no information about 'job_id' or how to obtain it. The meaning is too vague to be actionable.

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 clear verb ('cancel') and a specific resource ('unified job'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like cancel_codex_job. The term 'unified' is somewhat ambiguous without further context, but the core purpose is understandable.

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 phrase 'force only releases unconfirmed state' hints at when the force parameter should be used, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cancel_codex_job. No explicit conditions or exclusions are provided.

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