unity_undo_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It describes a read-only operation ('Get information'), which implies no side effects. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or mention any other behavioral traits such as rate limits or prerequisites.

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 a single concise sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient for a simple info retrieval tool.

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 lacks an output schema, and the description does not hint at what information is returned (e.g., undo group name, actions list, count). For a tool that retrieves data, this omission leaves the agent uncertain about the expected return value, reducing completeness.

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% for the single 'port' parameter, which is already described in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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 the tool retrieves information about the current undo group. It distinguishes from the sibling 'unity_undo' which performs an undo action, though not explicitly. The verb 'Get' and resource 'current undo group' are specific enough for an AI agent.

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 'unity_undo' or 'unity_redo'. The description does not provide context for when querying undo history is appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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