cancel_pipeline

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, confirming mutation. The description adds the dry_run behavior, which is a safety mechanism. However, it does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or post-cancellation state changes.

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, front-loaded with the main action. Every word adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a simple mutation with three parameters, the description is minimally adequate. It does not explain what happens when a pipeline is canceled, return values, or confirmations. More context would help, but the tool's simplicity keeps it at a passing score.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description reiterates the dry_run default, which is already in the schema. It adds no new meaning for project_id or pipeline_id. Baseline 3 applies.

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 action 'Cancel a running pipeline' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like retry_pipeline (opposite action) and get_pipeline/list_pipelines (read-only).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like retry_pipeline or get_pipeline. The description mentions the dry_run default but does not indicate when cancellation is appropriate or prerequisites.

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