cancel_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only names the action. It does not state whether cancellation is reversible, what happens to payments or fulfillments, or how the optional refund/restock flags affect the outcome.

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 extremely short, but under-specification is not conciseness. It fails to provide meaningful context or structure and merely repeats the tool name, so it does not earn its place.

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 mutation tool with four parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It omits effects, response format, permissions, and interaction with order states, making it inadequate for correct invocation.

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 provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all four parameters (id, reason, refund, restock). The description adds no parameter meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema already handles parameter documentation sufficiently.

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 'Cancel an order' is a tautology of the tool name 'cancel_order', adding no semantic content. It fails to distinguish cancellation from related order operations like close_order or delete_order, which is critical in a large sibling set.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use cancel_order versus alternatives (e.g., close_order, delete_order, create_refund). There are no prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent without decision support.

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