Cancel Saxo OAuth Login

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds the specific behavioral detail of closing the callback listener, and there is no contradiction. The description adds value beyond annotations without redundancy.

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 with the key verb first. No redundant or extraneous information; it earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (cancel with one param) and the description covers the core behavior. The destructiveHint annotation covers risk, but there is no mention of side effects, reversibility, or return value. Still, it is largely complete for the task.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the parameter 'ticketId' is undocumented in the description. The name suggests it identifies a ticket, but the description does not explain its format, origin, or how to obtain it. This leaves the agent with insufficient context to properly fill it.

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 (pending OAuth login flow) with the parenthetical detail about closing the callback listener. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like saxo_oauth_start and saxo_oauth_complete.

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 implies usage when an OAuth login flow is pending, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives (e.g., waiting for completion) or any prerequisites. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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