cancel_payment

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as side effects, reversibility, or authorization requirements. It simply restates the action without elaboration.

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 description is a concise three-word sentence with no filler, and it is front-loaded with the verb and object. However, it may be under-specified, which slightly reduces the score.

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 tool has only one parameter and no output schema, so the absolute need for detail is low. However, the description does not clarify what 'cancel' entails (e.g., status change vs. deletion), especially in contrast to the sibling delete_payment.

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?

With schema_description_coverage at 0%, the description does not explain the payment_id parameter beyond its name. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no additional meaning or format details.

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 a specific action ('Cancel') on a specific resource ('a payment'), which makes the primary purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate 'cancel' from the sibling tool 'delete_payment', which is a close alternative.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use cancel_payment versus alternatives like delete_payment or update_payment. There are no usage contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions stated.

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