Cancel order

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and idempotency are covered structurally. The description's only added behavioral value is the API rate-limit weight (Weight: 1), which is genuine but thin; it says nothing about auth requirements, partial-fill rejection, or the result of cancelling an already-filled order.

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?

Very short, which is appropriate for a two-parameter tool, but the first line merely repeats the tool title 'Cancel order' before the actual sentence, making the lead slightly redundant rather than front-loaded with unique information.

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 mutation with full annotation coverage and full schema coverage, the definition is minimally adequate - the agent can call it correctly. It omits any mention of error/failure behavior (e.g., cancelling a non-open order) and there is no output schema to defer to, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 100% - symbol and orderId are each documented in the schema - so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, range, or constraint detail beyond what the schema already states.

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 and resource (cancel an existing order), so an agent knows exactly what it does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings such as pionex_orders_cancel_all_orders or the bot-cancel tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives like cancel_all_orders or cancel-by-client-order-id. The agent must infer context entirely from the name.

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