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

The annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only, and the description reinforces and expands on that by explaining the two-step confirmation flow, the emailed 6-digit code, refund behavior, and time-window rules. This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations and contradicts none of them.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: trigger condition, policy rules, step-by-step procedure, and exclusion of order changes. The content is dense but well organized and front-loaded with the most important usage signal.

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?

The description fully covers when to use the tool, the ordered invocation steps, the policy constraints, and the key exclusion. With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, nothing necessary for an agent to call this tool correctly is missing.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 67%, the description explains how order_ref, confirm, and code are used across the two calls, including which parameters belong to the first versus second invocation. This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw schema.

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?

States a specific action (cancel an order) with a clear trigger condition (buyer explicitly asks) and ties it to the related create-order tool. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from order modification, making it easy for an agent to select correctly among the sibling tools.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: only when the buyer asks to cancel, and not for changing an order. It also details the cancellation rules and the exact two-step invocation flow, leaving no ambiguity about how to proceed.

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