Cancel an upload

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

Goes beyond the annotations by explaining that the tool invalidates the upload, reclaims staged project bytes, and removes temporary chunk parts. It also clarifies the tool is not for deleting a published artifact. These specifics complement the idempotentHint and destructiveHint annotations without contradicting them.

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 three tightly focused sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, the behavioral impact is stated in the second sentence, and the key exclusion and parameter source are included in the last sentence.

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?

The description provides purpose, side effects, an important exclusion, and the source of the required parameter, which is enough for a correct call. There is no output schemaholo, so the absence of return-value details is a minor gap rather than a blocker, especially given the simple cancellation interaction.

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 100%, so the parameter descriptions already define upload_id, tenant_id, and share_token meaningfully. The description adds the useful note that upload_id comes from upload_start)Skip but does not materially enrich parameter semantics beyond the 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?

Names a specific verb ('Abandon'), a resource ('unfinished remote upload'), and the exact user intent ('cancels publication or wants to restart it'). It also distinguishes itself by stating it does not delete a published artifact and references upload_start, making it easy to tell apart from other upload lifecycle siblings.

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?

Gives clear contexts for when to use the tool: user cancellation or restart. It also tells the agent where the upload ID comes from ('upload_start'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'do not use for X', but the when-clause and the exclusion of published artifacts provide enough decision guidance.

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