Cancel all orders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool 'fetches live orders and cancels every cancellable one', revealing the internal process and the limitation that only cancellable orders are affected. It could also mention that this is a destructive (write) operation, but the name and emergency tone imply that.

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 exceptionally concise at two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the critical 'Emergency' context and the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, optional filter, and behavior (fetches live orders, cancels cancellable ones). It is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's scope and side effects, though it could mention rate limits or authorization requirements.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% schema description coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra value by restating the optional filter, but does not provide additional details like format or constraints 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?

The description clearly states that the tool cancels ALL working orders for an account, with an optional symbol filter. It uses specific verb and resource ('cancel all orders', 'account', 'underlying symbol') and distinctly differentiates from the sibling tool cancel_order, which operates on a single 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 begins with 'Emergency:' to indicate urgent bulk use, and explains the optional filtering by 'underlying_symbol'. While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use it, the sibling tool list strongly implies that single-order cancellation should use cancel_order. The guidance is clear and contextually adequate.

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