Cancel Approval Request

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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals that this is a destructive operation. The description adds the useful constraint that only pending requests can be canceled, but it does not explain reversibility, permissions, or what exactly happens to the request after cancellation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a simple one-parameter cancellation tool, this is appropriately sized and every word earns its place.

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?

Given the simple parameter set and the destructiveHint annotation, the description is minimally sufficient to invoke the tool. However, it omits how this tool relates to sibling approval operations such as reject_request and does not describe post-cancellation behavior or return values.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the single id parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, syntax, or format details beyond what the schema provides, making 3 the appropriate baseline.

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 and resource: 'Cancel a pending approval request.' It clearly distinguishes cancellation from reading or listing, but it does not differentiate from siblings like reject_request or approve_request, which would require explicit comparison.

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 phrase 'pending approval request' implies the tool should only be used when the request is still pending, which is a basic usage condition. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose cancel versus reject_request or other approval-related tools.

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