cancel_open_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states that the tool cancels (a clear mutation) and returns 'Dict with canceled orders details or error', which is useful. However, it does not mention side effects, permissions, or edge cases like no open orders.

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 concise, with a clear and front-loaded main sentence followed by a simple Args/Returns block. Every sentence adds necessary information, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no annotations, but an output schema), the description covers the essential context: purpose, input format, and return type. It lacks deeper edge-case behavior, but for a straightforward cancel operation, it is sufficiently complete.

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 only defines 'symbol' as a string with no description. The description compensates by providing the format ('Trading pair') and a concrete example ('BTC/USDC:USDC'), giving the agent enough information to construct a valid parameter value.

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 ('Cancel'), the resource ('all open orders'), and the scope ('for the specified trading pair on Hyperliquid'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like place_order, close_position, and account_info by targeting a specific trading operation.

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 implies its usage by stating exactly what it does ('Cancel all open orders'), but it does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. The use case is clear but left to the agent to infer.

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