Cancel a Slurm job you own using its job ID. Stops queued or running HPC workloads when no longer needed.
Cancel one of your own jobs (scancel).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| job_id | Yes | SLURM job ID, e.g. '123456' or '123456_7' |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the irreversibility class is known without the description. The description adds one genuinely new behavioral fact, the ownership constraint ("your own jobs"), implying you cannot cancel others' jobs, but says nothing about what happens to a running job's output or whether it can be requeued.
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 short sentence with the action and the scoping constraint front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.
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?
Adequate for a one-parameter tool whose annotations carry the safety profile and whose schema fully documents the input. It still omits what state the job must be in and what the caller observes after cancellation, which for a destructive operation would be useful.
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?
Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents job_id including the array-task format '123456_7'. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the 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?
Specific verb (Cancel) plus resource (job) scoped by ownership ("your own"), and it names the underlying SLURM command (scancel). It is clearly separable from siblings like hpc_hold_job or hpc_release_job, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives named. An agent cannot tell from the description whether a running job should be cancelled versus held/released via the sibling tools, so selection is left entirely to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.