coronium_cancel_modem

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It goes beyond a simple 'cancel' by disclosing that auto-renewals stop, the modem stays active until the current period ends, and refunds are subject to terms. This is good behavioral context, though it could mention prerequisites like authentication or reversibility.

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 concise sentences with no waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds essential behavioral details. Every word 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?

For a single-parameter cancellation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers the action, effects, and refund policy. It could mention expected output or authentication needs, but given the simplicity, it is sufficiently complete.

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 covers 100% of parameter semantics, including the format and examples for the 'proxy' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline of 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 resource (modem subscription), and specifies the effect (no further auto-renew). It distinguishes from sibling tools like coronium_cancel_pool_key by explicitly mentioning 'modem subscription'.

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?

Provides clear context: the modem remains usable until tariff_expired_at and refund policy applies, which informs the agent about the consequences. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for a straightforward cancellation.

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