get_cancellation_requests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'active' scoping nuance (implying non-active/cancelled requests are excluded), but says nothing about pagination or result ordering.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource front-loaded. The trailing API endpoint path '(whmcs/get_cancellation_requests)' is marginally useful for traceability but slightly redundant.

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 read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety and full schema coverage, this is minimally adequate. It omits when-to-use routing and any return-shape hints, but nothing critical is missing for correct 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?

Only one optional parameter with 100% schema coverage ('Server ID (filter)'), so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no additional meaning about how the id filter behaves (e.g., whether omitting it returns all requests).

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('active service cancellation requests'), making the read intent unmistakable. The 'active' qualifier scopes it somewhat, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like delete_cancellation_request or request_cancellation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus request_cancellation (to create one) or delete_cancellation_request (to remove one). The agent must infer from names alone that this is the read-only listing counterpart.

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