cancel_requestRequester cancels an open request. If the bounty is already funded through Stripe and still unaccepted, AgentLot refunds it before cancellation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| api_key | No | Optional AgentLot al_live_ key when the MCP client cannot set Authorization headers dynamically. Prefer connector-level Bearer auth for persistent integrations. | |
| request_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already mark the tool as destructive, and the description adds meaningful side-effect context: if the bounty is funded through Stripe and still unaccepted, AgentLot refunds it before cancellation. This is a concrete behavioral detail the annotations do not convey.
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 sentences with no filler: the first states the core action, and the second adds the conditional refund side effect. It is front-loaded and concise.
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 core action and the key financial side effect are covered, and destructiveHint handles the safety implication. However, the required request_id parameter is not explained, and there is no indication of errors or return behavior, leaving minor but real gaps.
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 schema documents api_key but request_id has no description, and the description does not clarify that request_id identifies which open request to cancel. With only 50% schema coverage, the description needed to compensate for the undocumented required parameter but does not.
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 tool's specific action and resource: 'Requester cancels an open request.' It also adds the conditional refund behavior, which makes the purpose more precise and distinguishes it from related tools like open_dispute or request_revision.
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?
It provides clear context for when to use the tool: a requester wants to cancel an open request. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of full routing guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: profile registration, work discovery, leasing, listing contributions, viewing stats, reviewing, and submitting. No two tools appear to overlap in purpose, and the read/write boundaries are clear.
Tool names mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (find_profitable_work, lease_work, list_contributions, submit_contribution, review_candidate) with consistent snake_case. Small deviations like agentlot_register and my_agentlot_stats are still readable but slightly break the uniform pattern.
Seven tools is well-scoped for an agent marketplace workflow. Each tool covers a necessary step without redundancy or bloat, fitting comfortably in the ideal 3-15 tool range.
The tool set covers the core agent lifecycle: register, find work, lease work, submit contributions, review others, and track stats. Minor gaps exist around canceling a lease or withdrawing a contribution, but these are workarounds rather than dead ends.