bos_order_cancel

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the action but fails to mention key aspects like whether cancellation is reversible, what happens to payments, inventory, or notifications, or any permission requirements. This is a significant omission for a mutation tool.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. While it is not bloated, it is under-specified, indicating that brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the tool is minimally documented. For a mutation that cancels an order, important contextual information (e.g., effects on inventory, payment processing, notifications) is missing. The description fails to provide a complete picture for an agent to use it effectively.

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 input schema has two parameters ('order_id' required, 'reason' optional) with no descriptions. The description does not add any semantic detail about these parameters, such as expected format of order_id or examples for reason. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 'Cancel an order' clearly states the action (cancel) and the resource (order). It is specific and distinguishes it from related tools like 'bos_order_refund' or 'bos_order_update_status', though it could be more explicit about the order state required.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'bos_order_refund' or 'bos_order_update_status'. The description lacks context on prerequisites, consequences, or appropriate scenarios, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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