cancel_order

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

Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the 'open order' qualification, which is useful, but it does not mention side effects, error conditions, or idempotency behavior beyond what annotations provide. The description does not contradict annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. Every phrase earns its place by conveying the action, the target, and the source of the parameter.

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 one-parameter destructive tool, the description covers the essential information: what to cancel and how to identify it. Annotations cover the destructive/idempotent safety profile, and there is no output schema to explain. It is slightly light on error scenarios, but not incomplete for typical use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain that order_id must refer to an open order and where to obtain it, which adds meaning beyond the bare schema field. However, it does not describe format, length, or validation rules.

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 a specific verb ('Cancel') and resource ('open order') and clearly identifies the input ('order_id') and its source ('from get_orders or place_order'). This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, especially place_order and preview_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 description implies the usage context: cancel an order that was previously obtained via get_orders or place_order. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but since it is the only cancellation tool among siblings, the guidance is adequate.

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