GREENLANDAI

entity_history

Read-only

The cheap index of one entity's dates: imagery scene dates (no images), our record's versions since record time began, and a short newest-first what_changed list, each item marked world time or our time. Agent keys. Metered: see CHARGING in the server instructions; quote first with billing_quote.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The entity's numeric id. Required.
`entity_type`	Yes	Entity kind: deposit \| infrastructure \| company \| project. Required.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 29, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / entity_type / title
```
Removed value: -"Entity Type"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / id / title
```
Removed value: -"Id"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"entity_historyArguments"
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"entity_historyDictOutput"
```
Changed2 schema fields changedOct 29, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / id / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  }
+]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / id / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
Changed2 schema fields changedOct 17, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / entity_type / description
```
Added value: +"Entity kind: deposit | infrastructure | company | project. Required."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / id / description
```
Added value: +"The entity's numeric id. Required."
```
AddedOct 4, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe read (readOnlyHint true, destructiveHint false), and the description adds genuinely non-obvious traits: the call is metered, requires agent keys, and returns a short, size-limited newest-first list. It defers cost specifics to 'CHARGING in the server instructions' rather than quantifying, so it stops short of full transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two dense, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the resource scope comes first and operational constraints last. Some phrasing ('our record's versions since record time began', 'world time or our time') is cryptic in an otherwise tight definition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema, full parameter coverage, and explicit safety annotations, the description supplies the remaining pieces an agent needs: cost model, auth requirement, and the delimitation that no image payloads come back. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, including the entity_type enum values, so the baseline is 3. The description says 'one entity' but never elaborates on `id` or how entity_type interacts with it, adding no meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names the resource concretely and enumerates its three return components: imagery scene dates (explicitly without images), record versions, and a newest-first `what_changed` list. The parenthetical '(no images)' implicitly separates it from `look_at`, but no sibling is named outright, so an agent must infer the boundary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Signals this is the 'cheap index' to reach for before richer fetches and states an explicit prerequisite workflow: quote first via `billing_quote`. It stops short of stating when to prefer `entity_state` or `entity_change` instead, so the routing against those siblings is left to inference.

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

All GREENLANDAI tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?