Kagan - AI Orchestration Layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Cancel a task run', implying a destructive mutation, but lacks details on permissions needed, whether cancellation is reversible, effects on related resources, or error handling. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool has an output schema (which reduces need to describe return values) but no annotations and low parameter coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral details and usage context, making it incomplete for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by task id', which aligns with the single parameter 'task_id', adding minimal semantic context. However, it doesn't explain what a 'task id' is, its format, or where to obtain it, leaving gaps in parameter understanding.

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') and target ('a task run by task id'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from sibling 'run_cancel' by specifying 'by task id', though the distinction is minor as both likely refer to the same operation. However, it doesn't fully differentiate from all siblings like 'review_abort_rebase' or 'task_delete', which are also cancellation-like operations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'run_cancel' (which appears to be a direct sibling with similar function) or other cancellation tools such as 'review_abort_rebase'. The description implies usage for canceling tasks but offers no context on prerequisites, timing, or exclusions.

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