Cancel queued print jobs

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the fundamental danger is known. The description reinforces with 'cannot be undone' and the explicit-intent requirement, which adds a useful confirmation nuance, but does not disclose special behaviors such as partial failures when some job IDs are invalid.

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?

Two tight sentences with the scope front-loaded and the irreversibility warning second. No filler; every clause adds information an agent needs before calling a destructive tool.

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?

There is no output schema, and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description need not explain returns. Still, it omits the relationship between all_jobs, printer, and job_ids (mutual exclusion? precedence?) and the role of the confirmed parameter, leaving real gaps for a destructive 4-param tool.

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%, so the description carries the burden. It implicitly maps job_ids, printer, and all_jobs ('specified job IDs, or all queued jobs for one printer'), but says nothing about the required 'confirmed' flag beyond a vague 'explicit user intent', leaving one of four parameters unexplained.

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+resource: cancelling queued Windows print jobs by ID or all queued jobs for a printer. The 'queued' scoping helps distinguish it from siblings like stop_all_printing and retry_print_job, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Implies usage via 'requires explicit user intent' and the irreversible warning, which signals caution. However, it never says when to prefer this over stop_all_printing or how it relates to retry_print_job/inspect_print_job, leaving the agent to infer.

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