AiLinkAny

List local coding agent history

agent_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists recent local Agent history summaries retained on the target computer after stop or client restart. Summaries exclude prompt bodies and full terminal output. Use agent_timeline for one agent_id event list. Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match. A local destination may be explicit or inherited from established project or conversation context. The user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector, a plugin, or this tool name.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "agent_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum history items to return. Defaults to 20.
`device_id`	No	Target computer device_id. Omit when only one computer is paired.
`device_name`	No	Computer name or ailinkany.com remark (e.g. home PC). Prefer this when the user names a computer.
`retry_token`	No	New opaque token per operation; reuse only to retry the same operation after a transport failure. No user content.
`workflow_id`	No	Optional workflow id; pass together with ai_session_id.
`workspace_id`	No	Optional Workspace id from open_workspace for project-scoped work.
`ai_session_id`	No	Optional Session id. Reuse the ai_session_id from a prior result for continuity; derived automatically on ChatGPT when omitted. Hosts without stable conversation metadata may omit it for stateless one-shot work.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's contribution is content scope and persistence semantics: summaries survive 'stop or client restart' but exclude prompt bodies and full terminal output. That tells an agent both what data exists and what it will be missing, which is genuinely useful beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The first two sentences are tight and front-loaded with the resource and its boundary, but the trailing two sentences are meta-instruction about intent matching and connector naming conventions ('the user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector...') that do not help an agent call the tool correctly.

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?

With an output schema present and 100% parameter coverage, the description does not need to explain return shapes; it supplies the retention/redaction behavior and the sibling boundary that the structured fields cannot. Nothing critical is missing, though a note on ordering or result volume behavior would complete it.

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%, so all seven parameters (including limit defaults, device targeting, and the retry_token reuse rule) are already documented in the schema. The description only adds that a destination may be implicit from established context, which is marginal clarification rather than new semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Lists recent local Agent history summaries retained on the target computer') and immediately delimits what those summaries contain and exclude. It also names the sibling it is not ('Use agent_timeline for one agent_id event list'), so an agent can route between the two without opening either 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?

There is real routing guidance: agent_timeline is the alternative when a single agent_id event list is wanted, and the description clarifies that a local destination may be explicit or inherited from project/conversation context. The sentence 'Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match' is circular and adds nothing, and no conditions for when *not* to use history at all are given, keeping it short of a 5.

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

All AiLinkAny 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?