cancel_scheduleCancels a scheduled Threads post by ID when you no longer want it to publish. Returns a 409 publishing_in_progress error if the post is already going out.
Cancels a scheduled post by id. A post that is being published right now answers 409 publishing_in_progress. Applies when the user no longer wants a scheduled post to go out.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Post id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral detail about the 409 publishing_in_progress response, though it does not explain the post-cancellation state or permission requirements.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key exception and usage condition. No wasted language.
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 simple one-parameter mutation with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is nearly complete. It could add what happens to the post after cancellation, but the essential behavior is covered.
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%, and the sole parameter is documented as "Post id." The description only adds "by id" without format or validation details, so the schema does the main work.
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?
The description states a specific verb and resource: "Cancels a scheduled post by id." It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like list_schedules and schedule_text.
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?
It gives a clear usage condition: "Applies when the user no longer wants a scheduled post to go out." It does not name alternatives or exclusions, so it is strong but not exhaustive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.