Cancel Order

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, covering the destructive nature. The description adds that it only works on open orders and targets a single order, providing useful context beyond the annotation. No contradiction.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and scope. No filler or unnecessary detail.

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 operation with one parameter and an output schema present, the description covers the essential scope (single, open order) and the annotation covers destructiveness. It lacks explicit error conditions, but given the simplicity 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?

Schema has only order_id with no description and 0% coverage, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by order id' which is minimal and largely restates the parameter name. It adds that the id must belong to an open order, but does not explain where to obtain the id or its format.

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 the verb 'Cancel', the resource 'single open order', and the method 'by order id'. Clearly distinguishes from siblings like cancel_order_set (which cancels a set) and cancel_trade_intent (which cancels a trade intent, not an order).

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 scope is implied as 'single open order', which differentiates it from cancel_order_set for multiple orders. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it falls short of explicit guidance.

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