Cancel booking

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds substantive behavior: no cancellation fee, store-rules precheck that injects an 'Other' reason with the caller's text, silence unless notify=true, and removal from list_bookings. These are exactly the side effects an agent needs before committing an irreversible action.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with scope and the key reassurance (no fee), followed by preconditions, effects, and post-state. No redundant restatement of the name or title.

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 destructive, non-idempotent mutation with no output schema and four params, the description covers preconditions, fee implications, notification behavior, and resulting visibility. Nothing material is left for the agent to guess.

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%, so baseline is 3; the description goes further by explaining the semantics of `reason` (auto-filled as 'Other' when the store demands a reason) and the consequence of `notify` (nothing is communicated unless true). That is meaning beyond the schema's plain field descriptions.

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?

Specific verb (cancel) plus resource (booking), with exact scope stated as 'one booking or its whole recurring schedule.' An agent can distinguish it from reschedule_booking and get_booking without opening any schema.

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?

Gives clear context for use — checks the store's cancellation rules first, cancels like the sidebar button, no fee. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives (e.g. reschedule_booking for moving a booking) or state when not to use it, so it falls short of the top tier.

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