cancel_domain

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes nothing beyond that: it does not explain what happens to the domain after cancellation, whether the cancellation is scheduled at cancelDate, or that a cancellation can later be reversed via revoke_cancel_domain.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the sentence 'Cancel a specific domain' appears twice — once as prose and once as the endpoint label — which is pure redundancy rather than earned content.

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 mutation tool with a required nested request body, no output schema, and a closely related undo tool in the sibling list, the description should at minimum explain the cancellation lifecycle and point to revoke_cancel_domain. None of that is present, leaving the agent under-informed about consequences.

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%, including the nested body with the reason enum, cancelDate, reasonText and x-trace-id, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description mentions no parameters at all and therefore adds zero meaning 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 merely restates the tool name ('Cancel a specific domain') and appends the raw endpoint path. It names a verb and resource but adds no differentiation from neighbors like revoke_cancel_domain or update_domain, so an agent learns nothing beyond the title.

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 statement of when this tool should be used instead of revoke_cancel_domain, cancel_instance, or cancel_object_storage, nor any prerequisites such as domain ownership or pending-transfer state. Usage is only implied by the verb 'cancel'.

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