cancel_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It correctly implies mutating behavior and restricts to open orders, but it does not disclose what happens for unknown/already-closed IDs, reversibility, or related position effects.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler: verb, object, condition, and parameter are all present in minimal space.

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 simple one-parameter cancellation tool, the description covers what, how, and the open-order precondition. It is slightly incomplete because error/edge-case behavior and output are not described, but these are secondary for basic invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by stating that the sole parameter is the order ID used for cancellation. It adds practical meaning to the string type, though it does not specify ID source or format.

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 action ('Cancels') and exact resource ('open cTrader order'), plus the identifier method ('by its order ID'). This clearly separates it from siblings like close_position (positions) and amend_order/list_orders.

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?

Provides clear context: use it for open cTrader orders identified by order ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but 'open' and 'order' are sufficient directional guidance.

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