get_query_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral details. It only says 'return recent query history' without specifying ordering, error behavior, or read-only nature. It doesn't mention prerequisites like an active connection or limits beyond schema.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by use-case context. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, output schema existence, and clear schema descriptions, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose and usage scenarios but lacks minor behavioral details like chronological order, which might otherwise be expected.

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 both parameters described ('Database alias' and 'Number of recent queries to return (max 50, default 10)'). The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 'Return recent query history for a connection' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on history retrieval, which no other sibling tool does.

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?

The description provides clear context: 'useful for the editor AI to understand what has been executed recently' and gives explicit examples like 'run that again' or 'fix the last query.' It doesn't explicitly name alternatives but the usage guidance is strong.

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