hemmabo_booking_cancel

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description goes beyond by explaining that cancelling an already-cancelled booking returns the same status (idempotency behavior) and mentions rate limits and authorization, adding context that annotations do not cover.

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 concise (4 sentences) with a logical structure: purpose statement, usage conditions, behavioral notes, and parameter specifics. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary aspects: action, when to use, exclusions, authorization, idempotency, rate limits, and parameter source. It is fully sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, but the description adds value by specifying that reservationId must come from specific sibling tools (hemmabo_booking_checkout or hemmabo_booking_create) and that reason is optional free text forwarded to the host. This clarifies parameter usage beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Cancel a confirmed booking and process the Stripe refund per host cancellation policy.' It clearly specifies the verb (cancel), resource (confirmed booking), and distinguishes from pending/unpaid bookings, making it distinct from sibling tools.

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 description provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use when the guest explicitly requests cancellation') and when-not-to-use ('Do not use for pending/unpaid bookings — those expire automatically'). It also details authorization and rate-limiting requirements.

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