Skip to main content
Glama
vmware-skills

vmware-vdi

by vmware-skills
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

task_cancel

Destructive

Cancel a running pool task after reviewing its impact. Previews blast radius first; confirm=true to proceed.

Instructions

[WRITE] Cancel a running pool task (e.g. an in-progress image push).

A bare call reads the task and returns blast_radius (task type, state, progress) and cancels nothing; confirm=True cancels. A task whose type or state cannot be read is refused. Work already applied is not rolled back. Show blast_radius to the user and wait for their decision. Do not set confirm=True on your own because the user asked for this earlier: they have not seen the blast radius yet. Audited.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNoHorizon target from config.yaml; omit to use the default.
confirmNoFalse (default) returns the blast radius and changes nothing. True cancels.
pool_idYesThe desktop-pool id.
task_idYesThe task id (from task_status).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"False previews; True cancels."New value: +"False (default) returns the blast radius and changes nothing. True cancels."
  2. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.1.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Added value: +"False previews; True cancels."
    • addedInput schema / properties / pool_id / description
      Added value: +"The desktop-pool id."
    • addedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Added value: +"Horizon target from config.yaml; omit to use the default."
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_id / description
      Added value: +"The task id (from task_status)."
  3. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even with annotations marking destructiveHint=true, the description adds material behavioral context: bare call cancels nothing, confirm=True is required, unreadable tasks are refused, and already-applied work is not rolled back. The "Audited" note also signals operational oversight. This goes well beyond what the annotations alone convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the action and then uses compact, purposeful sentences to explain the workflow, safety guardrails, and error conditions. Every sentence contributes value, and the formatting keeps the two-phase behavior easy to follow.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the critical return for a bare call (blast_radius with type, state, progress), the cancellation trigger, refusal conditions, and non-rollback. With no output schema, it could more explicitly state what confirm=True returns after cancellation, which is the main minor gap. Overall it is complete enough for safe invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains all four parameters, including confirm's default/false behavior and target's default. The description reinforces confirm semantics but does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. This meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific action and resource: "Cancel a running pool task" with an example (image push). It also clarifies the two-phase nature of the tool (read blast radius vs. actually cancel), which removes ambiguity about what a bare call does. Sibling tools like task_status or pool_push_image are clearly distinct from this cancellation operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit guidance covers when to use the bare call vs. confirm=True, and includes a firm when-not: "Do not set confirm=True on your own because the user asked for this earlier: they have not seen the blast radius yet." It also states the refusal condition when task type/state cannot be read, giving the agent concrete guardrails for invoking the tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools