Cancel Task

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

With no annotations, the description bears full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that cancellation stops further recovery attempts, but omits whether cancellation is reversible, what task state results, whether it applies to running vs interrupted tasks, and what permissions or error conditions apply.

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. Every phrase contributes either the core action or a behavioral consequence.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is too thin. It should clarify the resulting task state, reversibility, and the role of the reason parameter to be complete enough for reliable invocation.

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%, and the description says nothing about either parameter. It does not explain the required taskId or clarify the optional reason parameter, including whether the reason is recorded or affects behavior.

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 and resource ('Cancel a task') and adds a distinguishing behavioral detail ('stop any further recovery attempts'), which separates it from siblings like mark_completed and report_interruption. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast those 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?

The description gives no indication of when to prefer cancel_task over mark_completed, report_interruption, or other lifecycle siblings, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Cancel'.

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