Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Surfing Dog Inbox

by ai.surfingdog
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Cancel

cancel_item
DestructiveIdempotent

Cancel an item you created. After the business's cancellation window, a confirmed booking is cancelled late where the business records late cancellations (it may count against the customer), and refused where it does not. A confirmed stay answers first with the fee under its policy and what is owed back (confirm): send its fee_sha once your person said yes.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyNoThe person's key (sdkey1_…), if that is all you have: it is exchanged once for a pass, which comes back in identity.passes — keep the pass and send it next time instead. Never stored.
passNoThe person's passes (sdpass1_…), space-separated, at most 8: presented to the network that issued each, so the business recognises the customer. Or send them in the Sdi-Pass header. Never stored.
reasonNo
fee_shaNoA confirmed stay: the fingerprint of the cancellation fee your person saw (details.fee_sha of the 409 confirm_terms a cancel without it gets).
item_idYes
access_tokenNoCapability secret returned when the item was created without an account.
idempotency_keyNoSame key + same request = same answer. Required for agents. Make it a fresh random UUID per request: a retry of a create with a random key gets its access token again.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key / description
      Previous value: -"Same key + same request = same answer. Required for agents."New value: +"Same key + same request = same answer. Required for agents. Make it a fresh random UUID per request: a retry of a create with a random key gets its access token again."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / fee_sha
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "A confirmed stay: the fingerprint of the cancellation fee your person saw (details.fee_sha of the 409 confirm_terms a cancel without it gets).",
+  "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{43}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare the destructive/idempotent profile, and the description adds real value beyond them: late cancellations may count against the customer, refusal where the business doesn't record them, refund of 'what is owed back', and a 409-confirm handshake before sending fee_sha. The wording is dense but the substantive behavior is disclosed; no contradiction with destructiveHint=true.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the second sentence is convoluted ('answers first with the fee under its policy and what is owed back') and reads awkwardly, forcing the agent to re-parse. Content earns its place; the phrasing does not.

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 destructive 7-param mutation with no output schema, the description covers the important hidden behavior: consequences of late cancellation, refund reporting, and the fee-confirmation handshake. It relies on the schema for credential handling, which is reasonable, so only minor gaps remain.

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 71%, so most parameters self-document. The description usefully explains that fee_sha belongs to the 409 confirm_terms response and should only be sent after the user agrees — context beyond the schema — but it leaves key/pass/access_token/idempotency_key entirely to the schema. Baseline 3 fits.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource ('Cancel an item you created') and describes the post-cancellation outcomes, so the core operation is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from adjacent siblings such as request_return or decline_offer, and 'item' is never defined (booking/order/stay), leaving some ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The embedded prerequisite 'you created' and the late-vs-refused branch imply when the tool applies, and the confirm flow is described. But there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not guidance and no named alternative for related flows (e.g. returns), so usage must be inferred.

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

All Surfing Dog Inbox toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources