kalshi_paper_cancel

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

With no annotations, the description must convey safety/behavior itself. It does disclose that only resting orders can be canceled and that cash is released, which is valuable. However, it omits details like idempotency, error conditions, or whether canceled orders are irreversible, so it falls short of full transparency.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded purpose, no wasted words.

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 low-complexity tool with fully documented schema, the description covers purpose, a key behavioral consequence (cash release), and a practical prerequisite. It's slightly thin on return values and error scenarios but sufficient for a paper trading helper.

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 covers both parameters fully with descriptions and an example. The description adds the tip to retrieve order IDs via kalshi_paper_portfolio, augmenting the schema's information.

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 specifies the action ('Cancel'), the object ('resting simulated order'), and the consequence ('release cash'), which distinguishes it from live cancel tools (kalshi_cancel_order_v2) and paper order/portfolio siblings.

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?

It explicitly directs users to kalshi_paper_portfolio for order IDs, providing clear context for using the required parameter. It doesn't explicitly contrast with live cancel tools, but the word 'simulated' implies the paper context, earning a 4 rather than 5.

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