Cancel a specific open limit order on Polymarket using its unique order ID. Provide the order ID to remove an unwanted trade.
Cancel an individual specified open limit order directly via its unique ID.
Args: order_id (str): The unique transaction order ID returned functionally during order placement.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| order_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states that the order is 'open' and canceled 'directly' via its ID, but does not disclose whether cancellation is irreversible, what permissions are required, what happens if the order is already filled, or any error/failure behavior.
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 front-loaded with the tool's action and scope, followed by a single parameter note. It is appropriately sized overall, though 'individual specified' is slightly redundant and 'returned functionally' is imprecise.
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?
For a simple single-parameter cancellation tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It identifies the parameter's origin but omits important behavioral context such as permissions, finality, and edge-case handling, which matters for a mutation operation with no annotations.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds useful meaning by identifying order_id as the unique transaction order ID returned during order placement, but it is somewhat awkwardly worded and does not specify the expected format or constraints of the ID.
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 states a specific verb (cancel) and resource (an individual specified open limit order via its unique ID). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like cancel_all_orders and cancel_orders by emphasizing the individual, ID-based scope.
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?
The phrase 'individual specified open limit order' implies this is for canceling one order rather than many, which implicitly contrasts with bulk cancel tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.