Skip to main content
Glama

Get citation check history

get_citation_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Citation-check history for a site, newest first, filterable by engine and window (bounded: max 90 days, max 100 rows per page). Pass nextCursor back as cursor for the next page (null on the last), to read the whole window. Each row carries scope: the lane that wrote it (full = a full check, daily = the daily check, sweep = a sweep check), observedQueries: the web searches that engine ran for the answer (null = not exposed by the engine, [] = none ran), and model: the model that answered (null before 2026-10-21 or for engines without one). instrumentChanges lists our own measurement changes (an engine's model switch: engine, date, from, to, notice) dated inside the days the rows span; movement across one may come from the model, not the site.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLook-back window in days (1–90, default 30).
limitNoMax rows per page (1–100, default 50).
cursorNonextCursor from the previous page.
engineNoOptional engine id (e.g. perplexity, openai, gemini).
siteIdNoOptional on a connected app: the site chosen with select_site is used. If given, it must be that site. With an API key it is required: a site id from list_sites.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / siteId / description
      Previous value: -"A Promvia site id. Get one from list_sites."New value: +"Optional on a connected app: the site chosen with select_site is used. If given, it must be that site. With an API key it is required: a site id from list_sites."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
      -  "siteId"
      -]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "nextCursor from the previous page.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Max rows (1–100, default 50)."New value: +"Max rows per page (1–100, default 50)."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds a lot: hard bounds (max 90 days, max 100 rows per page), explicit pagination termination ('null on the last'), and the null-vs-empty distinction for observedQueries (null = engine does not expose searches, [] = none ran). It also discloses the caveat that movement across an instrument change may come from a model switch rather than the site, which is exactly the kind of interpretation guidance annotations cannot carry.

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?

Purpose, bounds, and pagination are front-loaded in the first two sentences, before the row-field detail. The single dense paragraph is efficient for the amount of information conveyed, though the long row-field enumeration would scan better broken into sentences or a list.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the full burden of explaining return shape, and it does: scope lanes (full/daily/sweep), observedQueries, model with its temporal caveat, and instrumentChanges with its fields. For a bounded, paginated read-only list tool, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description earns above baseline by resolving a naming mismatch: the schema's 'cursor' parameter is fed by the response's 'nextCursor'. It also restates the semantic meaning of the rows the days/engine filters select. It does not add anything for siteId, which the schema already covers thoroughly.

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?

The description opens with a concrete verb+resource framing: 'Citation-check history for a site, newest first, filterable by engine and window.' It is unambiguous about what is returned and in what order. It stops short of naming how it differs from the sibling get_citations, so an agent must infer the history-vs-current distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives clear operational guidance for paging ('Pass nextCursor back as cursor ... to read the whole window'), which is genuinely useful. But there is no statement of when to call this versus get_citations or get_evidence, and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond the schema-stated siteId rules.

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.