cancelCharge
Cancel an unresolved charge by providing its code or ID.
Instructions
Cancels an unresolved charge by its code or ID.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| charge_code_or_id | Yes | The code or ID of the charge to cancel. |
Cancel an unresolved charge by providing its code or ID.
Cancels an unresolved charge by its code or ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| charge_code_or_id | Yes | The code or ID of the charge to cancel. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action but does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or constraints such as whether cancellation is reversible or if it triggers notifications.
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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.
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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the action. However, it lacks details on return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances, leaving some gaps for full contextual completeness.
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 100% with the parameter clearly documented. The tool description adds no new information beyond the schema; it merely reiterates the parameter's purpose. 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 specific action (cancel) and the target resource (unresolved charge) along with the input method (by code or ID). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like listCharges, createCharge, and showCharge.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions or exclusions. The description implies it's for canceling unresolved charges, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/savhascelik/meta-api-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server