return_energy_rental

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the role-dependent address requirements and pre-check condition. Annotations already indicate destructiveness, and the description aligns with that, but does not detail side effects like refunds or timing.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the main purpose, and every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema and a straightforward cancellation operation, the description covers input requirements and pre-conditions adequately. It could be more complete by mentioning post-cancellation outcomes, but overall it is 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?

The schema already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, but the description adds crucial role mapping semantics: 'As a renter, provide the receiver address. As a receiver, provide the renter address.' This clarifies how to use the counterpartyAddress parameter.

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 action is to cancel an active energy rental, uses specific verbs 'Return (cancel)' and resource 'active energy rental', and distinguishes from the sibling 'rent_energy' which is for creating rentals.

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 clear guidance on when to use the tool and role-specific inputs, mentioning pre-requisites (active rental must exist). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or recommend alternatives.

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