Retrieve a list of recently evaluated patterns from the current TidalCycles session. Optionally specify how many history items to return.
Get the history of patterns evaluated in this session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of history items to return (default: 10) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the phrase 'evaluated in this session' adds scoping context. However, it does not disclose the return format, ordering, or explicitly state that no state is modified, which is only minimally adequate for a simple getter.
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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and scope, making it highly efficient.
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?
This is a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description plus schema is sufficient for basic invocation, but the return format of the history is not described, leaving some ambiguity about what an agent should expect in the response.
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 100%, as the only parameter 'limit' is fully described with its default value and meaning. The description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('history of patterns evaluated in this session'). It distinguishes itself from sibling getter tools like tidal_get_state and tidal_get_samples by scoping to session-evaluated patterns, making the purpose unambiguous.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or sibling tools, so an agent must infer appropriate usage solely from the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.