delivery_notes_cancel

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: allowed statuses (draft/issued), historical record preservation versus deletion, and the optional cancellation reason. It does not cover permissions or downstream effects, but the added context is meaningful.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and condition, and no wasted words. The final sentence about the optional reason is slightly redundant with the schema but still relevant.

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 cancel mutation with no output schema, the description covers the key conditions (statuses) and distinguishes from deletion. It gives enough context to invoke correctly, though it could mention error behavior for invalid statuses or effects on related documents.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description only mentions the optional cancellation reason, adding marginal value without syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 ('Cancel a delivery note') and adds the condition 'when delivery will not occur.' It implicitly distinguishes itself from deletion by noting it 'preserves historical record unlike deletion,' though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like delivery_notes_delete or delivery_notes_storno.

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?

Usage context is clear: cancel when delivery will not occur, and only from draft or issued status. However, there are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives (e.g., when to use storno or delete instead), which keeps it below a 5.

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