cpu_cancel_lot

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: atomic transaction, return path through waypoints, fee structure (foreign hub costs $CPU, otherwise free), gas payment, and the requirement to call cpu_finalize_delivery. It also mentions tracking tools.

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 sentences, each packed with essential information. No redundant or vague phrases. Front-loaded with the core action and then details. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (cancellation with return shipment, fees, multi-step process), the description covers all key aspects: prerequisites, parameter details, cost, follow-up action, and tracking. No output schema, but the result (return of units) is implied.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning: for 'lotId' it clarifies ownership ('must be yours'), and for 'chain' it explains the role of the first and last elements (hub and destination) and the fee trigger (foreign hub).

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 uses specific verbs ('Withdraw an OPEN lot') and clearly identifies the resource and action. It distinguishes from siblings like cpu_create_lot and cpu_buy_lot by focusing on cancellation and return of unsold units.

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 states prerequisites ('Requires a session') and provides guidance on the required 'chain' parameter. It explains fee implications and the need to finalize delivery, but does not explicitly mention scenarios where this tool should not be used.

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