cancel_scheduled

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden for a mutating/destructive operation. It does not say whether cancellation is reversible, whether the message must not yet have fired, whether confirmation is required, or what error behavior looks like.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It is efficient, though terse enough that some behavioral specifics are omitted rather than compressed.

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?

For a one-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the basic action but leaves the agent without enough context about irreversibility, prerequisites, or expected result. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema, including that the id comes from schedule_message or list_scheduled. The description adds no further meaning beyond that baseline, so a 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 message scheduled with schedule_message"), which is enough to separate it from schedule_message and list_scheduled. It stops short of describing what cancellation means operationally, so not a 5.

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 usage is implied by the verb: use this to cancel an already-scheduled message. There is no explicit guidance on finding the id first (via list_scheduled) or on when cancellation is not possible, so the guidance is only inferred.

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