mcp-cloudron

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it returns updated task status with state 'cancelled', cannot cancel completed tasks, and performs resource cleanup (e.g., partial backups deleted). This covers mutation effects and constraints beyond basic functionality.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, followed by key behavioral details. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description compensates well by explaining return values ('updated task status with state "cancelled"') and cleanup behavior. However, it could mention error cases or permissions, leaving minor gaps for a mutation tool with full context burden.

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% (taskId is well-described in schema), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, as it doesn't elaborate on taskId format or examples. It relies on the schema for parameter details.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Cancel a running async operation') and resource ('task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like cloudron_task_status (which checks status) and cloudron_control_app (which controls apps). The 'kill switch' metaphor reinforces the purpose.

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 provides clear context on when to use it ('running async operation') and when not to ('Already completed tasks cannot be cancelled'), but does not explicitly mention alternatives like cloudron_task_status for checking status or other task-related tools. This is helpful but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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