cancel_order_by_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it only states the core action ('Cancel'). It does not disclose implications such as irreversibility, restrictions on order state (e.g., only open orders), or error handling if the order no longer exists. The behavioral scope is minimal.

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 action verb and resource. No extraneous words or redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks context on side effects, exceptions, or what happens when the order cannot be canceled. Given the simplicity, this is a reasonable but not thorough description.

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 schema already fully describes the order_id parameter as a UUID string with the description 'order id', achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning, so baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the action ('Cancel') and the target resource ('a specific order'), with the qualifier 'by its ID' distinguishing it from bulk-cancel and other order operations. This is specific and unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The phrase 'a specific order' implies single-order cancellation, contrasting with sibling tools like cancel_all_orders, but it does not name them or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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