edgex_cancel_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Cancel...' without mentioning side effects (e.g., irreversibility), whether only open orders can be cancelled, behavior on invalid IDs, or any response format. This is insufficient for a mutation 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It states exactly what the tool does without any fluff, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 has a simple one-parameter schema with complete coverage, but no output schema and no annotations. The description clearly explains the core functionality, yet leaves out information about return values, error handling, or edge cases. For a simple cancellation operation, this is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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 input schema already provides a complete description for the single parameter (orderIds: 'Array of order IDs to cancel'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning, such as ID format or semantics beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Cancel'), the resource ('orders'), and the scope ('one or more... by ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like edgex_cancel_all_orders, which cancels all orders instead of specific ones.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies that this tool should be used when you have specific order IDs to cancel, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No comparative guidance is given despite the presence of edgex_cancel_all_orders as a clear alternative.

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