Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Wiro MCP Server

Wiro MCP Server

Official
by wiroai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Cancel a queued Wiro task

cancel_task
DestructiveIdempotent

Cancel a model task that is still queued. It is refused once the task has started; kill_task stops a task in either state. A task cancelled while queued is never charged.

Instructions

Cancel a model task that is still queued. It is refused once the task has started; kill_task stops a task in either state. A task cancelled while queued is never charged.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskidNoThe task ID (alternative to tasktoken).
tasktokenNoThe task token returned from run_model.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYes
actionYes
messageYes
successYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.3
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.2.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / taskid
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The task ID (alternative to tasktoken).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / tasktoken / description
      Previous value: -"The task token to cancel"New value: +"The task token returned from run_model."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "tasktoken"
-]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "action": {
+      "enum": [
+        "cancel",
+        "kill"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "task": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "token": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "action",
+    "success",
+    "task",
+    "message"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observedv1.1.4

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so safety is largely covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the operation fails after start and a queued cancellation incurs no charge — cost consequences are not in any structured field. It doesn't describe what the response contains, but an output schema exists to carry that.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the action, the failure boundary, the alternative, then the billing consequence. The defining constraint is front-loaded before the sibling comparison.

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?

For a cancel tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential unknowns — refusal condition, sibling relationship, and billing. The only gap is which of the two optional identifiers to supply, which no structured field resolves.

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 coverage is 100%, so taskid and tasktoken are documented in the schema and the baseline applies. The description adds no guidance on which identifier to prefer, which matters because neither parameter is required yet at least one is presumably needed to identify the task.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Cancel a model task') plus a state qualifier ('still queued') that precisely delimits scope. It also implicitly separates itself from kill_task, which is named in the next sentence, so an agent can pick between them without opening schemas.

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?

Gives an explicit when-not condition ('refused once the task has started') and names the alternative ('kill_task stops a task in either state') with the rule that selects it. Nothing about tool selection is left to inference.

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