Commons Wikimedia

File Revisions

file_revisions

Read-onlyIdempotent

File revision history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`title`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	No
`batchcomplete`	No	Whether the query is complete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 22, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "title": "File:Cat.jpg"
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "title": "File:Ancient_manuscript.pdf"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "batchcomplete": {
+      "description": "Whether the query is complete",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "query": {
+      "properties": {
+        "pages": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "imageinfo": {
+                "description": "Array of image revisions",
+                "items": {
+                  "properties": {
+                    "comment": {
+                      "description": "Edit summary or comment",
+                      "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "sha1": {
+                      "description": "SHA1 hash of revision",
+                      "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "size": {
+                      "description": "File size in bytes",
+                      "type": "number"
+                    },
+                    "timestamp": {
+                      "description": "Revision timestamp",
+                      "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "url": {
+                      "description": "File URL for this revision",
+                      "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "user": {
+                      "description": "Editor username",
+                      "type": "string"
+                    },
+                    "userid": {
+                      "description": "Editor user ID",
+                      "type": "number"
+                    }
+                  },
+                  "type": "object"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              },
+              "missing": {
+                "description": "True if file not found",
+                "type": "boolean"
+              },
+              "ns": {
+                "description": "Namespace ID",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "pageid": {
+                "description": "Page ID",
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "title": {
+                "description": "File title",
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 18, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name itself, such as authorization requirements or rate limits.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While short, the description is under-specified and does not front-load essential information. Single phrase lacks structure; every word does not earn its place because it fails to add value.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the low schema coverage and missing parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. Even though an output schema exists, the input side is not adequately described for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the purpose or constraints of the 'title' or 'limit' parameters. The agent has no guidance on how to use them.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'File revision history.' is essentially a tautology, restating the name 'file_revisions' and title 'File Revisions'. It does not use a specific verb or resource to differentiate from siblings like file_info.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., file_info). The context signals show many sibling tools, but the description offers no context.

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

All Commons Wikimedia 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.