Generation History

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

The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or potential impacts. With no annotations, this minimal information leaves users uncertain about behavior beyond the basic retrieval.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and endpoint.

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 description lacks essential context such as the return format, pagination details, or whether history is cleared after retrieval. For a simple read tool, this brevity leaves important gaps for a user unfamiliar with the API.

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 input schema provides a description for the 'id' parameter ('Filter by task/job id.'), and the tool description adds no additional meaning. Since schema coverage is complete, the baseline score of 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 generation history entries and includes the API endpoint. It is specific about the resource, though it largely restates the title without adding further detail.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sdnext_latent_history or sdnext_list_latents. There is no mention of appropriate contexts or prerequisites.

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