XP Tickets

Cancel My Open Offer

cancel_my_open_offer

Destructive

Closes one of the caller's open offers on XP to new fills -- 'cancel that open offer', 'stop waiting on those'. Fills it already took are completed purchases and stay. An offer on a single listing is cancelled with cancel_my_offer. confirm=false returns a preview; confirm=true cancels it. Requires sign-in.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "open_offer_id": "<open_offer_id>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_my_open_offer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	No	False (default) previews. True closes the offer to new fills.
`open_offer_id`	Yes	The standing_bid_id of an open offer, from list_my_open_offers.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely new behavior — partial fills already executed remain completed purchases, and sign-in is required. The one gap is that it never says whether the cancel itself can be undone, though the preview path partially mitigates this.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The action and scope are front-loaded and every sentence carries distinct information: scope, partial-fill retention, sibling routing, confirm semantics, auth. It loses a point only for slightly telegraphic phrasing ('on XP to new fills') that an unfamiliar agent may need a beat to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema available and annotations covering the destructive/read-only profile, the remaining burden is scope, prerequisites, side effects, and alternatives — all of which are present. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly, including the sign-in requirement and preview step, is missing.

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 both parameters (confirm and open_offer_id, including its provenance from list_my_open_offers) are already documented in the schema. The description's restatement of the confirm preview/cancel semantics adds clarity but no meaning beyond the structured fields, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Closes one of the caller's open offers') and immediately bounds the scope ('to new fills'), so the agent knows this terminates an offer rather than completing a purchase. It also names the sibling cancel_my_offer and the condition that selects it (single-listing offer), making the two tools distinguishable without opening either schema.

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?

Provides explicit routing: use cancel_my_offer when the offer is on a single listing, use this tool otherwise, plus natural-language triggers ('cancel that open offer', 'stop waiting on those'). The confirm=false/true preview-then-commit pattern is spelled out as a usage sequence rather than left to inference.

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

All XP Tickets tools Inspect

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

Need Help?