opentable_cancel_reservation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It explicitly warns 'This action cannot be undone' and explains the preview vs. actual cancel behavior, which are important side-effect disclosures.

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 with a distinct and necessary purpose: stating the action, explaining the confirm flag, and warning about irreversibility. No extraneous information.

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 two-parameter cancellation tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the critical aspects: the operation, the preview workflow, and the irreversible consequence. It does not describe the return value or success behavior, but this is not essential for this simple action.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both confirm and reservationId. The description also repeats the confirm semantics but adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Cancel an existing reservation.' This is a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like opentable_make_reservation or opentable_get_reservations.

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 how to use the confirm parameter: 'Set confirm=false to preview, confirm=true to actually cancel.' This gives practical usage context, though it does not explicitly discuss when to choose this over alternatives (which are not applicable here).

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