Skip to main content
Glama

itemnumbers MBS schedule

Get item history

get_item_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Show how one MBS item's descriptor and schedule fee changed across the schedule releases held here, newest first. Use it to answer what an item paid or said on an earlier date. Only the releases ingested are listed; it is not a complete history of the item.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "item_number": "<item_number>"
    },
    "name": "get_item_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_numberYesAn MBS item number, 1 to 6 digits, for example 30445.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: results are newest-first and limited to ingested releases, which is an important coverage caveat that prevents over-trusting the output.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what it does, then the use case, then the coverage limitation. Every sentence carries information that changes how an agent would use the result.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description names the returned dimensions (descriptor and schedule fee across releases) plus ordering, which is enough to interpret results. It stops short of describing exact record shape or how to cite a specific release, a minor remaining gap.

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% and the single item_number parameter is fully documented in the schema with type, pattern and example. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource — showing how an MBS item's descriptor and schedule fee changed across schedule releases held here — and adds the ordering (newest first). That scope is clearly distinguishable from get_mbs_item (current value) and get_item_relationships, so an agent can pick it without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a concrete use case: answering what an item paid or said on an earlier date. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling get_mbs_item for current values, so the routing is clear but not fully spelled out.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources