Huỷ mã QR

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says cancellation happens, without revealing whether the cancellation is irreversible, what happens if the QR was already scanned, or any side effects on associated transactions. This is a significant transparency gap for a destructive operation.

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 uses two short, parallel sentences (Vietnamese and English) that communicate the action directly. It is front-loaded, scannable, and wastes no words.

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 single-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too thin. It omits parameter semantics, behavioral side effects, and any response hints. An agent would need to infer too much to invoke it correctly and confidently.

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 0% and the description does not mention qr_code_id at all. While the parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation. An agent is left guessing what value to pass and how to obtain it.

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 dynamic QR' (Huỷ một mã VietQR động đã tạo). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like monapay_create_qr and monapay_cancel_checkout. The bilingual text reinforces the same unambiguous 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 phrase 'already created' implies a prerequisite: the QR must be dynamic and existing. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like monapay_cancel_checkout, nor any mention of conditions or exclusions. The usage context is only lightly implied.

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