cancel_scheduled_post

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known from structured data. The description adds genuine value by clarifying that cancelling does not delete posts that have already been executed, which is not derivable from the annotations and is consistent with them.

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 short sentences with the primary action front-loaded and the boundary condition (does not delete executed posts) immediately following. No filler or redundant restatement.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the non-destructive behavior and idempotency are covered. The only material gap is the lack of guidance on schedule_id provenance and on when to choose cancellation over an alternative operation.

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?

There is only one parameter (schedule_id) and the schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but does so only marginally by referring to 'the specified scheduled post'. It does not explain the format of the schedule_id or where to obtain it, leaving an agent to infer this from sibling tools.

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 (cancel the automatic execution of the specified scheduled post) and clarifies the scope of the action. It distinguishes the operation from sibling operations like list_scheduled_posts through the explicit cancel semantics, though it doesn't name a sibling or alternative directly.

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 gives enough context to infer that this tool is for scheduled posts that have not yet executed, and that previously executed posts are out of scope. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives routing, such as pointing to a delete or edit counterpart when a scheduled entry should be modified rather than cancelled.

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