fgis_cancel_job

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

Annotations only say the tool is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds meaning by specifying 'cooperative cancellation after the current request/import' and 'preserve downloaded data,' disclosing timing and data-safety behavior. It does not detail post-cancel job state, but that is a minor gap given annotations.

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 sentence front-loads the operation and then adds the two most important qualifiers: cooperative and data-preserving. No filler or repetition.

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 tool with annotations, the description covers what it does and its key side-effect behavior. It doesn't specify return values or error conditions, but no output schema exists and the tool is simple enough that this is a minor omission.

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 never mentions job_id, its format, or how to obtain it. The one required parameter is documented only by name/type, so the description adds no semantic value for parameters beyond the obvious inference.

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?

Description says 'Request cooperative cancellation after the current request/import; preserve downloaded data,' giving a specific verb, resource, and behavioral qualifier. It clearly separates this tool from job-status/read sibling tools and from fgis_resume_job.

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 cooperative/timing language implies this is for gracefully stopping an in-flight job/import while keeping downloaded data. However, there are no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use conditions or references to alternatives such as fgis_resume_job or fgis_job_status.

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