Huỷ mã QR

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond 'dynamic' VietQR: it does not say the QR becomes unusable, whether a cancelled QR can be regenerated, or what the caller should do next, so it contributes little behavioral context.

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?

Two short bilingual sentences with the verb and resource front-loaded; nothing is padded. The Vietnamese/English duplication is slightly redundant but keeps it readable for both audiences.

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 destructive, irreversible-seeming cancel operation with no output schema, the description is too thin: it omits success/failure behavior, error conditions (e.g. invalid or already-cancelled id), and how to obtain qr_code_id. The annotations cover safety, but the agent still lacks the operational detail needed to call this confidently.

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 0% and the single parameter qr_code_id is undocumented in both schema and description. With one required param at 0% coverage the description should clarify where the id comes from (e.g. the output of monapay_create_qr), but it does not.

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 (cancel) and resource (dynamic VietQR), which is more precise than the tautological title 'Huỷ mã QR'. It implicitly contrasts with monapay_create_qr, but does not name an alternative or clarify against the similar monapay_cancel_checkout sibling.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are named. The phrase 'đã tạo' (already created) only weakly implies the QR must pre-exist, leaving the agent to infer preconditions.

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