avanza_paper_cancel

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

The description discloses that the operation never changes Avanza and is safe in read-only mode, which is important behavioral context beyond the schema. With no annotations present, it carries the burden and does so well, though it omits details about failure behavior or return values.

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 short sentences, front-loaded purpose and then the read-only safety note; no fluff.

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 single-parameter local cancellation tool, the description covers purpose, scope, and side-effect profile in just two sentences. It lacks an explicit return-value description and prerequisites, but given the low complexity and absence of output schema, it is adequately 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?

The only parameter, paper_order_id, has no schema description (0% coverage), but the description's phrase 'local paper order' clarifies that the ID identifies an order in the local paper-trading system, adding context beyond the bare schema. Still, no explicit guidance about where to obtain the ID is provided.

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?

States a specific verb ('Cancel'), a specific resource ('local paper order'), and clarifies its scope as local/paper, distinguishing it from real-order cancellation tools like avanza_open_order_cancel and avanza_order_delete.

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?

Explicitly frames the tool as canceling a local paper order and notes it is allowed in MCP read-only mode, signaling when it is appropriate. It does not explicitly name sibling cancellation tools, but the 'local paper order' phrase provides a clear usage context.

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