payware_data_cancel_export

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the mutation/idempotency profile is covered by structured data. The description adds genuine value with the QUEUED-only failure condition, but says nothing about the authentication requirement implied by the privateKey parameter, what state the export ends in, or how a rejected cancellation is reported back.

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 sentences, zero filler, and the operative constraint is stated immediately after the purpose. Nothing here could be removed without losing 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 single-target mutation with a fully documented schema and annotations covering the destructive/idempotent profile, the definition supplies what an agent needs to decide and call correctly. The only meaningful gap is the lack of guidance on the non-QUEUED path and on auth prerequisites, which is minor at this complexity.

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%, with exportId (UUID format), partnerId (env-var default, dashboard source), and privateKey (auth key, env default) all documented inline. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource pair ('Cancel a running export process') with the '[Merchant]' audience tag, which is enough to separate it from sibling read tools like payware_data_get_export_status or payware_data_download_export. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings as alternatives, so it is clear but not maximally differentiating.

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 sentence 'Only exports in QUEUED status can be cancelled' gives a real precondition that governs when invocation succeeds, which is more than most definitions offer. However, it does not tell the agent what to do when the export is not QUEUED (e.g., check status first with payware_data_get_export_status) or point at any alternative tool, so the guidance is implied rather than complete.

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