clouddlp_profile_history

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds nothing beyond it — no statement about retention window, pagination, ordering, or whether a missing profile errors versus returns empty. For a history-listing endpoint these traits matter.

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?

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of waste, with the [READ] tag usefully signaling the operation class. It is efficient only because it is under-specified — concision here is achieved by omission rather than precision.

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?

No output schema, no annotation detail beyond readOnlyHint, and zero parameter coverage means the description is the only source of semantics — and it provides none about return shape, ordering, or ID format. Inadequate for even a simple history endpoint.

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 description coverage is 0%, so profile_id is documented nowhere; the description mentions 'profile' but does not say whether the ID is the profile name, numeric ID, or a resource path, nor whether the parameter is required. With a single undocumented required parameter, the description should have compensated and does not.

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?

"[READ] Read DLP profile history" gives a verb (read) and a resource (DLP profile history), which does differentiate it from the sibling clouddlp_profile / clouddlp_profiles that return the profile itself. However, "history" is never defined — version history, change log, or audit trail are all plausible — so the agent cannot predict the payload.

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 call this versus clouddlp_profile or clouddlp_profiles. The only implied usage is 'if you want past states rather than current state', which the agent must infer entirely.

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