cancel_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the order must be open, but does not disclose whether cancellation is irreversible, what happens for already-filled or expired orders, or any required permissions. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 compact and front-loaded: a single clear sentence states the action, followed by a short list of valid variety values. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail; every element contributes useful 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?

The tool is simple with only two required parameters and an output schema exists, so return value explanation is unnecessary. However, with no annotations and no explicit usage guidance, the description leaves the agent to infer cancellation semantics and the role of the variety parameter. It is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds the valid variety values (NORMAL | STOPLOSS | AMO | ROBO), which provides meaning beyond the bare schema titles. However, it does not define these varieties or clarify where to find the order_id, so the compensation is only partial.

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 action and target: 'Cancel an open order by its order id.' This specific verb and resource make it easy to distinguish from siblings like place_order, modify_order, and get_order_book. The variety list further clarifies the scope of orders covered.

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 implies when the tool should be used—when an open order needs to be canceled by its ID. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, such as using modify_order to change an order or gtt_cancel_rule for GTT rules.

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