xrp_cancel_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only 'Cancel an existing DEX order' without mentioning that this is a state-changing operation, requires the private key of the order owner, is irreversible, or what happens if the order does not exist. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. It contains no filler and every word contributes to clarity. It is appropriately sized for a tool with only two simple parameters.

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?

The tool is simple with only two required parameters, and the schema covers them thoroughly. However, the description lacks context about usage scenarios, side effects, or how to obtain the offer_sequence. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps in understanding the full operational context.

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%, with both 'privateKey' and 'offer_sequence' already clearly described. The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already handles semantics.

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 uses the specific verb 'Cancel' and the resource 'existing DEX order,' making the tool's primary function immediately clear. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like xrp_place_order and xrp_cancel_escrow, as it explicitly targets DEX orders rather than other order types.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing to own the order, or how it relates to placing orders or getting order book data. There is no indication of when to prefer this over xrp_cancel_escrow or other sibling tools.

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