cancel_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'open order' as a condition but does not mention consequences (e.g., irreversibility), error behavior if the order is not open, permissions, or idempotency. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutating 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 is a single, focused sentence with no filler. It conveys the essential action and scope in five words, earning full marks for conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema present, so return values are covered. However, the absence of annotations and the lack of details about error handling or preconditions mean the description is only minimally complete. It works for a straightforward cancellation but leaves the agent without guidance on edge cases.

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 0% for the single parameter order_id. The description adds no explanation of what order_id is or how to obtain it beyond the schema's own title 'Order Id.' The description says 'specific open order' but does not connect that to the parameter, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema 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 uses the specific verb 'Cancel' with a clear resource: 'a specific open order.' It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool cancel_all_orders by emphasizing 'specific,' making the scope unambiguous.

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 clearly indicates this is for cancelling a single open order, which provides clear context for use. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, such as 'use cancel_all_orders to cancel multiple orders.' Therefore it stops short of a 5.

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