stackspot_cancel_pot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that contributed STX is recovered, the lock-state precondition, the unlocked-wallet requirement, and mainnet-only availability. It omits transaction-level details such as gas or finality, but the key mutation and constraint context is present.

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 front-loaded with the primary action and precondition, then adds wallet, network, and formatting notes. The trailing tip about earning_opportunities is slightly tangential but does not materially reduce clarity.

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 single-parameter cancellation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, preconditions, wallet state, network availability, and parameter format. It does not describe the expected response, but most operational context an agent needs is present.

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 contractName and its accepted formats. The description reinforces the bare-name or fully-qualified identifier usage but adds little beyond what the schema provides, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: cancel a Stackspot stacking lottery pot before stacking begins. It clearly distinguishes the action from siblings such as stackspot_start_pot and stackspot_join_pot by focusing on pre-lock cancellation.

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 states when the tool can be used (pot must not yet be locked) and when it cannot (once stacking begins). It does not name alternative sibling tools for the post-lock state, so it falls short of a full 5.

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