hl_cancel_order

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

No annotations were provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds the environment key requirement, which is valuable, but does not disclose what happens on failure (e.g., order not found, already canceled) or any side effects, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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?

Description is very concise with three lines: purpose, requirement, and parameter list. No extraneous text, front-loaded with the main action.

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 presence of an output schema (reduces need to explain return values) and a sibling tool, the description adequately covers key aspects. However, missing details like error handling and idempotency could leave an agent underinformed for a cancellation operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description provides clear, meaningful explanations for both parameters: 'Asset symbol e.g. BTC' for coin and 'Order ID to cancel' for oid. This adds value beyond the schema's bare titles and types, though could be more precise about format constraints.

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?

Description clearly states 'Cancel a specific order by order ID', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'hl_cancel_all_orders' by emphasizing 'specific 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?

Mentions prerequisite 'Requires HL_PRIVATE_KEY in env', which is useful. Implicitly distinguishes from cancel-all sibling by specifying 'specific order', but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternative scenarios.

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