domains_cancelOutgoingDomainMoveV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the precondition (not yet accepted) and a key effect ('The domain stays in your account'). However, it does not mention potential side effects, error cases, or required permissions, 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?

The description is three short sentences, each delivering a distinct piece of value: the action, the condition, and the effect. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no redundant or fluff content.

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 one-parameter cancel operation with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential context: what it does, when it can be used, and what happens to the domain. It could mention error behavior or response format but is otherwise complete for selection and invocation.

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 has one parameter 'domain' fully described as 'Domain name' with 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond referring to 'a specified domain,' so the schema carries the full meaning. Baseline 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 a specific action ('Cancel an outgoing move') and a specific resource ('for a specified domain'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like domains_startOutgoingDomainMoveV1 and domains_acceptIncomingDomainMoveV1.

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 provides a clear condition for use ('only be cancelled while the receiving account has not accepted it yet') and a stated purpose ('withdraw a move you no longer want to complete'). It implies a when-not (after acceptance) but does not explicitly name alternative tools or scenarios.

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