get_agent_history

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

No annotations are provided; the description explicitly lists what the tool returns (escrows, dispute rate, completion rate, quality score, trust score), offering transparency about its behavior.

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 description is concise and well-structured: a clear summary sentence, followed by bullet points of output fields, usage guidance, and parameter details, with no wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description fully covers its functionality and use case, making it complete for agent 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?

The description adds meaning to the required parameter 'agent_id' by providing a type and example ('e.g., agent_weather_v2'), compensating for 0% schema description coverage.

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 the tool retrieves full transaction history and trust metrics for an agent, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_escrow_status or list_escrows.

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?

It provides context for when to use ('evaluating agent reliability before transacting') but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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