Cancel Recurring Jules Schedule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the action but does not disclose consequences such as whether future scheduled sessions are removed, whether existing sessions remain, or whether cancellation is reversible.

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 one short, direct sentence with no filler. It is concise, though it sacrifices useful detail for brevity.

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 is simple, but without annotations, parameter guidance, or usage context, the description is too thin. It does not explain the effect of cancellation or how to identify the correct schedule, leaving an agent to rely on inference.

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 one parameter, scheduleId, with 0% description coverage. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name; it does not explain what the scheduleId refers to or suggest using jules_list_recurring_schedules to find it. The name is self-evident but underdocumented.

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 resource ('recurring session schedule'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also implicitly differentiates from siblings like jules_schedule_recurring_session and jules_list_recurring_schedules by focusing on cancellation.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, how to obtain a valid scheduleId, or whether this should be used instead of deleting individual sessions. The intended workflow is not explained.

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