Cancel Scheduled Publish

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and the description's only added detail is that the specific field being cleared is the scheduled publish time. It does not say what happens if no schedule exists, whether the content's published/draft state changes, or what permissions are required.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, front-loading the verb and the target of the operation. It is arguably too terse for the behavioral gaps it leaves, but as a sizing judgment it is efficient and well-structured.

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 mutation whose idempotency and safety are covered by annotations, this is mostly adequate. Gaps remain around the resulting content state after cancellation and whether a missing schedule is an error or a no-op.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents content_id and the description adds nothing beyond it. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 (clear) and object (the scheduled publish time) scoped to a content item, which is easy to distinguish from its inverse sibling schedule_content_publish. It does not explicitly name that sibling or clarify the relationship, but the action itself is 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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as schedule_content_publish, unpublish_content, or delete_content. The use case is only inferable from the tool name and purpose statement.

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