Cancel pending order

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=true. The description adds only the timing constraint ('before it executes'), but does not clarify behavior for invalid or already-executed orders, or any other side effects beyond cancellation.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words or repetition. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope.

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 simple 1-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the main action and conditions. However, it could mention typical success/error behavior to avoid ambiguity, but given the low complexity, it is mostly 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?

Schema_description_coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. It does not explain how to obtain the orderId or any constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb 'cancel' and the resource 'pending limit or market order', with a specific condition 'before it executes'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like etoro_close_position, which closes an executed position.

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 for pending orders only ('before it executes'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like etoro_get_orders for obtaining orderId. No exclusions or context on order lifecycle is provided.

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