Cancel a booking

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

The disclosure of idempotency adds value beyond annotations. The description is consistent with annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). It could mention other behaviors like notifications or refunds, but the existing context is adequate.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences to convey core purpose and idempotency. No extraneous words exist; every sentence adds essential information.

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?

While the description covers purpose and idempotency, it fails to explain the 'project' parameter. Given three parameters and no output schema, the description should be more thorough to fully guide the agent.

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 low (33%). The description only clarifies 'id' and 'reason' but omits any explanation of the 'project' parameter, which is required. This leaves a significant gap in understanding the tool's input requirements.

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 action (cancel), the resource (booking), and specifies the id comes from list_bookings. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools by being specific to booking cancellation.

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 indicates when to use the tool (with a booking id from list_bookings) and mentions idempotency. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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