cancelSale

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds crucial context: the operation is irreversible, sets canceled flag to true, zeroes quantities and total, automatically refunds points and select payments, and sets commission to 0 if not yet fixed. It also lists unsupported scenarios beyond annotations.

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 comprehensive but slightly lengthy; however, it is front-loaded with the main action and covers all necessary details without redundancy. It could be more succinct but remains clear.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the effects (flags, totals, refunds) and provides sufficient context for a destructive operation. It could mention the return value or error conditions, but the existing detail is strong.

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 description fully explains both parameters: sale_id identifies the target order, restock controls automatic restocking. Despite only 50% schema description coverage, the description compensates completely by adding meaning to both parameters beyond the schema.

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 the tool cancels an existing order and triggers returns/refunds. It specifies the verb 'cancel' and resource 'sale', and distinguishes from siblings like updateSale (for updates) and getSale (for details).

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 explicitly says when to use (to cancel an order) and when not (split orders and credit card with Epsilon are not supported). It also mentions alternatives: updateSale for updates and getSale for details.

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