Cancel the ride

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds context annotations cannot: that the first call is a non-destructive preview which surfaces Uber's cancellation notice and any fee, and that no cancellation happens without confirm. The safety-critical behavior of each phase is stated rather than inferred.

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 sentences with the two-call structure front-loaded and the two branches (without confirm / with confirm) mapped one-to-one onto the parameter states. Every clause carries operative information; nothing is padding.

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 destructive mutation with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description supplies exactly what structured fields cannot: the preview/commit split, the fee disclosure, and the human-confirmation gate. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already defines confirm as the preview's confirm_token to be used after the user's yes. The description reinforces this by tying the token to the leaving-nothing-cancelled preview call, clarifying the token's provenance and the gating rule, though it adds no format or length guidance beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Cancel the current ride") and immediately flags the non-obvious two-call contract. No sibling tool in the list (request_ride, ride_status, trip, trips) overlaps with cancellation, so the agent can route here without ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly prescribes the sequence: call without confirm first to get the fee preview and confirm_token, then call with confirm only after the person says yes. This is both a when-to-use rule and a when-not-to-act rule in one short passage.

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