cancel_run

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

Discloses the key behavioral constraint (only cancels Running/Waiting runs) but lacks details on consequences, permissions, rate limits, or error handling. As no annotations exist, the description should do more to explain side effects.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. Front-loads the core action, then adds constraints and prerequisite guidance. Every sentence is valuable.

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 output schema and simple mutation operation, the description covers purpose, constraints, and prerequisite lookup. Missing information on return values or errors, but adequate for a cancellation tool.

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 covers parameters 100%, but description adds critical semantic info: workflowName is required for Standard SKU, which is not in the schema's required list. This extra context improves parameter understanding beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool cancels running/waiting workflow runs with specific verb and resource. Does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like resubmit_run or search_runs, but the status conditions help distinguish.

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?

Provides explicit conditions for cancellation (only Running or Waiting status) and suggests finding runs first using list_run_history or search_runs. Also notes the requirement for workflowName in Standard SKU, giving clear contextual guidance.

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