Cancel put.io transfers

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

Beyond the annotations (destructive, non-readonly, idempotent), the description adds crucial behavioral details: it distinguishes between stopping seeding and removing an entry based on state, and explicitly states that downloaded files are not deleted. This gives the agent a clear understanding of the side effects without relying solely on annotations.

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 three short, purposeful sentences. It is front-loaded with the core action, then explains conditional behavior, and ends with a key non-effect. No words are wasted.

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 simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and annotations already covering safety, the description is complete. It explains what happens to seeding transfers, non-seeding transfers, and explicitly clarifies that files are not deleted. Nothing relevant is missing.

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 input schema already covers 100% of the parameters, including a description for 'transferIds' ('Transfer ids to cancel'). The tool description only says 'by id', which adds no new information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Cancels or removes transfers by id') with a specific verb and resource. It also differentiates the behavior between seeding and non-seeding transfers, distinguishing it from sibling tools like putio_clean_transfers. This is specific and unambiguous.

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 description provides clear context on when to use this tool: when you have specific transfer IDs and want to cancel or remove them. It also gives an important exclusion ('Downloaded files are not deleted') which guides expectations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or contrast with siblings like putio_clean_transfers, so it stops short of a 5.

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