Historical pricing time-series for a model or provider. Each point is a dated snapshot of the per-Mtok rates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| model | No | Model id to fetch history for. | |
| since | No | ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD); only points on/after this date. | |
| until | No | ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD); only points on/before this date. | |
| provider | No | Provider id to fetch history for (all its models). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions data is a time-series with dated snapshots per-Mtok rates but does not disclose caching, data freshness, error handling, or behavior when no data matches. Minimal behavioral insight.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences with no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with purpose, then explains data point meaning. Efficient and clear.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Lacks output schema and annotations. Does not explain time granularity, page size, or how provider and model interact (mutually exclusive? required?). Agents need more detail for correct usage.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for each parameter. Tool description adds context about return format (dated snapshot) but does not enhance parameter understanding beyond schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it provides historical pricing time-series for a model or provider, using specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like estimate_cost or list_models, which cover different functionalities.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like estimate_cost for current pricing or list_events for deprecation events. The description lacks context on prerequisites or exclusive use of parameters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.