cursor_cloud

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It notes 'cancel is gated', indicating limited availability. However, it does not describe behaviors for status, runs, or error states, nor any authentication or rate limits. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states purpose and key caveat, the second reinforces usage. Every word adds value.

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?

Given moderate complexity (4 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the primary use case and a critical limitation (cancel gated). It could detail other operations (status, runs) but the schema provides parameter docs. Slightly improved with more behavioral context.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond 'list and inspect'. Baseline at 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'List and inspect Cursor cloud agents', providing a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools (cursor_docs, cursor_help, etc.) by focusing on cloud agents. The mention of 'read-first' and 'cancel is gated' further clarifies scope.

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 advises 'list often' to monitor runaway spend, implying proactive monitoring. It also warns that cancel is restricted. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives like status or runs, though sibling tools are distinct.

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