Skip to main content
Glama

Sliq

by com.getsliq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Node History

get_node_history
Read-only

Reads the append-only position log directly, so an off_sequence node id a later flow edit dropped still returns its history. A node no one has moved off — including the start node, which stores no position rows of its own — comes back empty. Dict with node_id, count, and prospects array. count is how many prospects went through and moved on in total (independent of limit/offset, so the page count is ceil(count / limit)); prospects is the requested page, newest visit first, each {id, name, email, linkedin_url, provider_id, current_node_id, visited_at} — current_node_id is the node they rest on now, visited_at the ISO time they last held node_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax prospects returned per page, newest visit first (default 50, capped at 200).
offsetNoHow many of the newest-first prospects to skip. Page through a node with more than `limit` history by re-calling with offset 0, then `limit`, then `2*limit`, … until `offset >= count`.
node_idYesThe node whose history to read — a node id from get_campaign_flow.
agent_idYesID of the agent (campaign) to read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / agent_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ID of the agent (campaign) to read.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / task_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "ID of the task (campaign) to read.",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "task_id",
-  "node_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "agent_id",
+  "node_id"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses behavioral details: it reads the append-only position log directly, still returns history for dropped off_sequence nodes, and returns empty for nodes no one has moved off, including the start node. It also explains count semantics independent of limit/offset, which is valuable non-obvious behavior.

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?

The description is longer than minimal but well-structured with a summary and returns section, and it front-loads the core purpose before edge cases. It includes some expansion such as the node-detail panel comparison but that aids orientation, so it earns a high score rather than a perfect one.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description compensates fully by documenting the return shape, pagination behavior, edge cases, and sibling distinctions. An agent has everything it needs to invoke the tool correctly 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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic value: it clarifies that agent_id can be any user campaign, that node_id comes from get_campaign_flow, and explains how limit/offset interact with the total count for pagination. These details go beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it reads a Campaign Flow node's 'went through' history, defines exactly which prospects are included, and clarifies this is the history counterpart to get_campaign_flow. It also explicitly differentiates from query_prospects for current occupancy, so an agent can select it without confusion.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives concrete use cases ('who passed through the connect step', 'who has already been through step 2'), names the alternative for current occupants ('filter query_prospects on current_node_id instead'), and notes it works across any of the user's campaigns, not just the agent in context. This is explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Sliq toolsInspect
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