ingrammicro_cancel_order

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

Beyond the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description discloses the irreversible failure behavior, the customer-hold requirement, and the lack of a preflight check. This is exactly the sort of contextual risk information an agent needs before invoking a destructive API.

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 slightly verbose but every sentence adds meaningful warning or constraint information. The opening sentence states the core purpose immediately, and the subsequent block explains critical edge-case behavior without unnecessary 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?

Given the single parameter, the presence of an output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers all essential guidance for a destructive operation: when it is valid, what makes it fail, why human confirmation is needed, and what cannot be determined in advance. Nothing critical is missing.

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 input schema already fully describes the single parameter, order_number, including a concrete example. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 order before it reaches Ingram Micro's warehouse.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling order-related tools like create_order, modify_order, and get_order by focusing on the cancellation action and its timing constraint.

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 timing conditions for use: cancellation is only possible before the order reaches the warehouse and while it is on customer hold. It also warns against using it after release and advises human confirmation. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the guidance is practical and clear enough for an agent to decide when to call it.

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