preview_order_cancellation

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full behavioral burden and it does well: it discloses the non-destructive nature ('It does not cancel anything'), the five-minute preview window, and the requirement for user confirmation. It does not specify the exact return shape or any side effects, but the key safety-relevant behavior is transparent.

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?

Three concise sentences, each earning its place: the action, the critical non-destructive clarification, and the required follow-up workflow. The most important information is front-loaded, with zero filler.

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 one-parameter preview tool, the description covers purpose, behavior, and the next step in the workflow. The absence of an output schema is partially mitigated by the instruction to 'present the order details,' though richer details about what the preview returns would make it 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 single parameter orderId is fully described in the schema with type, bounds, and meaning, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, making baseline 3 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Check a pending order and create a five-minute cancellation preview.' It also explicitly distinguishes the tool from an actual cancellation with 'It does not cancel anything,' making its purpose unmistakable among siblings like preview_market_order and execute_confirmed_action.

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 gives clear workflow context: use it for pending orders, present the details, and then call execute_confirmed_action only after direct user confirmation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it beyond the fact that it does not cancel, which keeps this at a 4 rather than a 5.

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