cancel_download

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: cooperative cancellation, idempotent re-cancel, in-flight HTTP requests finish first, files are NOT deleted, and the final result preserves completed items plus unfinished_ids. This is far richer than a bare 'cancel' and discloses side effects and lifecycle behavior clearly.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope, then lifecycle and side-effect details. Sentences each carry distinct information (idempotency, polling requirement, file retention, resume path) with little redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists so return payloads needn't be spelled out, yet the description usefully characterizes the terminal result (completed items + unfinished_ids). Combined with lifecycle and idempotency notes, an agent has enough to invoke and follow through correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single task_id parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The description implies the task lives in a shared task directory but never states the expected id format or source, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 (cancel) plus resource (background download task in a shared task directory) and immediately distinguishes the operation as cooperative. An agent can tell it apart from retry_download, start_download, and get_download_task without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly notes that repeated cancellation is safe (idempotency guidance) and points to retry_download for resuming unfinished items, plus tells the agent to keep polling to terminal state. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' clause, but the usage context is clear.

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