get_cancellation_reasons

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of safety and behavior. It discloses a read-only tier ('readonly-owner'), an endpoint mapping, and a batch size limit (1000 IDs), which are meaningful behavioral traits. It does not elaborate on invalid-ID handling or output structure, but the added constraints provide solid transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource, followed by essential technical details (endpoint and tier). Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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?

This is a straightforward get-by-IDs tool with one parameter and no output schema. The description covers the key aspects: purpose, batch limit, and endpoint. It omits details about the exact shape of 'full records,' but given the tool's simplicity, the provided context is largely sufficient.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. Although it does not syntactically detail the 'reasonIDs' parameter, it clarifies that 'IDs' are cancellation reason IDs and sets a practical limit of 1000, effectively explaining the parameter's meaning and constraint.

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 ('Get'), a clear resource ('full cancellation reason records'), and a scope ('up to 1000 IDs'). It distinguishes itself from sibling 'search_cancellation_reasons' by emphasizing 'full records' and retrieval by IDs.

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 clearly implies the tool is for fetching full records when you have reason IDs, and the 'up to 1000 IDs' limit sets a usage boundary. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use it, yet the context is clear enough.

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