cancel_order

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description goes well beyond them: it discloses irreversibility, a server-side human approval gate, denial behavior on refusal, and that refusals are logged. This is exactly the operational context an agent needs before invoking a destructive, gated tool.

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?

Three tight sentences with no filler; the core action is front-loaded, followed by the risk/gating context, then the routing alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers the remaining gaps an agent would care about: irreversibility, the approval gate, denial semantics, and the sibling alternative.

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% and the single order_id parameter is already documented with an example ('4417') and a pointer to list_orders, so the description adds nothing further. Baseline 3 for full schema coverage.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Cancel an order') and immediately differentiates itself from the sibling add_note, which is the nearest-looking alternative. An agent can distinguish it from list_orders/lookup_order/add_note without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly states the when-not case ('To record information without cancelling, use add_note') and the condition under which the call fails (refusal or no terminal). Alternatives and failure conditions are named rather than left to inference.

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