cancel_all_orders

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond annotations: the 'KILL SWITCH' all-at-once semantics and the 'Respects dry-run' caveat. No contradiction with annotations — the destructive framing aligns with destructiveHint=true.

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?

Three short clauses — what it does, when to use it, and the dry-run caveat — with zero filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded before the usage guidance, and every sentence 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 zero-parameter tool with annotations covering the destructive/read-only profile, the description covers what it does, when to use it, and a key behavioral caveat. It could be a 5 with an explicit pointer to single-order cancel siblings, but nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters (empty schema), so the baseline of 4 applies — there is no parameter meaning for the description to add or clarify. The description correctly focuses on behavior rather than invented parameter detail.

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 states a specific verb and resource — 'cancel every resting Polymarket order on the operator account' — with a clear scope ('at once'). The bulk 'every...at once' framing distinguishes it from single-order siblings like kalshi_cancel_order and cancel_order without needing to open their schemas.

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?

'Use when exposure must go to zero fast' provides an explicit trigger condition for the emergency bulk-cancel scenario. However, it doesn't name the alternative for single-order cancellation (cancel_order / kalshi_cancel_order) or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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