cancel_pending_mail_cloud_jobs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that it cancels ALL pending jobs and sets a specific status and reason, but does not mention potential side effects, irreversibility, or permission requirements. It provides the core behavior but lacks depth.

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 that directly states the action, target, and effect with no extraneous words. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's action. However, it assumes domain knowledge of 'Office-attachment Cloud-Jobs' which could be clarified. Still, it is sufficient for most use cases.

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 has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details (unneeded) and does not mislead. It correctly implies no configuration is required.

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 (cancel), the specific resource (pending Office-attachment Cloud-Jobs), and the exact state change (set status='notSupported', reason='user cancelled'), making it specific and distinct from sibling tools like list or retry.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as retry_failed_mail_cloud_jobs or retry_incomplete_mails. The description does not provide context for when cancellation is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.

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