ib-async-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

cancel_all_orders

Cancel all open trading orders through the Interactive Brokers API. This tool removes pending trade requests to manage positions and prevent unwanted executions.

Instructions

Cancel all open orders.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cancel_all_orders"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Implementation Reference

src/ib_async_mcp/server.py:662-664 (handler)
The handler implementation for the cancel_all_orders tool, which calls ib.reqGlobalCancel().
```
if name == "cancel_all_orders":
    ib.reqGlobalCancel()
    return {"status": "cancel_all_requested"}
```

src/ib_async_mcp/server.py:283-287 (registration)

The registration of the cancel_all_orders tool with its description and schema.

Tool(
    name="cancel_all_orders",
    description="Cancel all open orders.",
    inputSchema={"type": "object", "properties": {}},
),

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description does not disclose destructive nature, scope (which account/portfolio), or whether confirmation is needed. For a cancel-all action, more transparency is expected.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, no extraneous words, front-loaded with verb and resource.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple action with no parameters, description is mostly adequate. Missing details on scope (e.g., all orders across all accounts) but given simplicity, it's nearly complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. Description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the verb 'Cancel' and resource 'all open orders', distinguishing it from sibling 'cancel_order' which cancels a single order.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cancel_order' or other trading commands. No context on prerequisites or when not to use.

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