speechify_cancel_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the important non-effect that remote items survive cancellation. It does not say what happens to the job record afterward, whether cancelling an already-submitted job errors or is a no-op, or whether the call is idempotent — meaningful gaps for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope limitation ("without deleting remote items") is placed where it is most useful. Nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter mean the description has to do more than one sentence. It omits the return value or resulting job state, error behavior for submitted jobs, and where the job_id originates, leaving real gaps for a mutating 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 coverage is 0% for the single parameter, so the description must explain job_id, and it never mentions it. There is no hint whether the id comes from speechify_upload_text, speechify_list_jobs, or speechify_get_job, nor any format guidance.

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 ("Cancel") and resource ("unsubmitted upload work"), and implicitly distinguishes itself from the destructive siblings by noting it does not delete remote items. An agent can tell this is not a delete operation, though the term "job" appears only in the tool name and parameters, so the link between "upload work" and a job is left implicit.

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?

"Unsubmitted" implies the precondition (the job must not have started uploading), which is useful implied guidance. However, it names no alternative — with siblings like speechify_get_job, speechify_list_jobs, and speechify_retry_job present, an agent gets no explicit routing such as checking status first or retrying instead of cancelling.

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