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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds little nuance. It states preconditions (terminal listing, no live reservation) without explaining consequences or idempotent behavior. The verb 'unlock' is inconsistent with a destructive cancel action, creating mild confusion.

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?

The first sentence is convoluted and front-loads a conditional clause that obscures the action. The second sentence is tangential help text. It is not concise or well-structured; it does not prioritize the core purpose.

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?

Given the destructive nature (annotations), absence of an output schema, and zero schema parameter descriptions, the tool description is markedly incomplete. It does not explain what happens when the tool is called, how to meet preconditions, or what success looks like. An agent cannot reliably use this tool.

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?

The single parameter offer_id has no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the tool description does not explain what offer_id refers to, how to obtain it, or its format beyond the integer minimum. The description completely ignores the parameter, leaving the agent without any semantic grounding.

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 does not clearly state what the tool does. The title says 'Cancel a world listing' but the description says 'Unlock a terminal world offer's thing' – a different verb and object that is vague and jargon-heavy. It fails to explicitly say it cancels a listing, making it hard for an agent to know its core function.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'front_door' for orientation but does not contrast with siblings like list_world or claim_world. The preconditions are stated but not the selection criteria.

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