cancel_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that cancellation applies to 'open orders' and mentions routing to 'Algo API' for conditional orders, which adds useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens to partially filled orders.

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 sentences, zero waste. First sentence states core purpose, second provides crucial conditional logic. Perfectly front-loaded with essential information followed by important nuance.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations but with output schema (which handles return values), the description covers the essential purpose and conditional routing logic well. It could be more complete by mentioning authentication or error handling, but for a trading API tool with good schema coverage, it's reasonably 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it mentions 'orderId or clientOrderId' and provides context for 'is_algo' parameter, but doesn't explain parameter interactions or provide additional semantic meaning.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Cancel a single open order') and identifies the resource ('by orderId or clientOrderId'). It distinguishes from sibling 'cancel_all_orders' by specifying 'single' and from 'modify_order' by focusing on cancellation rather than modification.

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 clear context for when to use 'is_algo=True' (for conditional orders from get_open_orders with '_isAlgo': True). It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cancel_all_orders' or 'modify_order', but the 'single open order' scope implies differentiation.

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