cancel_video

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that — it terminates a process tree, implying in-flight render work is killed rather than just flagged. However, it omits irreversibility, idempotency, and what happens to any partial output or artifacts already produced.

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?

One tight sentence with the effect front-loaded and no filler. It is perhaps too brief for a destructive operation, but nothing in it is wasted or buried.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, for a destructive, non-open-world tool with one undocumented parameter, the description should at least connect job_id to its source and indicate whether cancellation is safe to retry or valid on already-finished jobs.

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 single required parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description bears the full burden — but it says nothing about job_id. It doesn't indicate whether this is the id returned from generate_video, a storyboard id, or a status-polling key, which is exactly the ambiguity an agent would hit here.

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 a specific resource ('this job'), with an additional concrete effect ('terminate its render process tree'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like generate_video or get_video_status, though it doesn't explicitly name the job type (video render job) that ties it to generate_video.

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 on when to use it: nothing says it applies only to queued/running jobs, nothing about checking get_video_status first, and nothing about whether it is intended for stuck or misconfigured renders. The agent must infer the usage context from the tool name alone.

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