cancel_reservation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It reveals that the action is cancellable without admin login and uses specific credentials. However, it does not describe side effects (e.g., confirmation emails, reversibility) or whether the cancellation is immediate.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the main action and includes key differentiators. No unnecessary words or 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?

Given the simple tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool does and its public nature. It could be improved by mentioning the result of cancellation (e.g., reservation status) but is otherwise complete.

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%; the schema already describes all three parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond stating that invoice and email are used for cancellation. Notes parameter is not elaborated further.

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 a reservation) and identifies the key inputs (invoice number and guest email). It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting it's public-facing and requires no admin login, making it unique among cancellation tools.

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 tells when to use (guest cancellation) and implies the context (no admin login). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools like delete_reservation or bulk_delete_reservations for admin use.

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