Cancel the active Waymo ride

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive (destructiveHint=true) and non-read-only. The description adds important behavioral guardrails: the cancellation must be preceded by a fresh fee preview and explicit user confirmation. This goes beyond the annotation flags, though it does not detail consequences such as cancellation fees.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and then states both prerequisites. Every word earns its place, with no filler or 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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the two critical preconditions: fresh fee preview and explicit user confirmation. Minor gaps include not naming the preview tool directly and not mentioning potential fees, but the destructive hint and title cover the general context.

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 has one parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. 'Explicit user confirmation' indicates the purpose of the confirmation parameter, and the schema's const 'CANCEL' defines the allowed value. However, the description does not explicitly state that the confirmation value must be 'CANCEL', leaving the mapping partially implicit.

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 a specific verb ('Cancel') and a specific resource ('the active Waymo ride'), and the phrase 'after a fresh fee preview' distinguishes it from the sibling waymo_preview_cancellation. However, it does not explicitly name the sibling, so the differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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 usage conditions: call only after a fresh fee preview and after explicit user confirmation. This gives the agent a concrete sense of when the tool should be invoked, but it does not mention alternatives or say when not to use it beyond these preconditions.

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