jobs_runs_cancel_all

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description's mention of 'cancel' adds no new behavioral traits. It does specify 'active runs,' which implies only currently running runs are affected, but additional context (e.g., whether runs are terminated or what happens on failure) is missing.

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 a single sentence of 7 words, front-loaded with the action verb. Every word is necessary and it avoids any fluff.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. However, given the presence of siblings, a brief note on differentiation would have made it more complete.

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 100% with a clear parameter description for job_id. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 the exact action: cancel all currently active runs of a job, using a specific verb ('cancel') and resource ('runs of a job'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like jobs_runs_cancel (which cancels a single run) and jobs_runs_repair.

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 implies the tool should be used when you need to cancel all active runs of a job, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., jobs_runs_cancel for a single run) or when not to use it.

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