get_correction_history

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

States 'BEHAVIOR: pure read. No side effects.' and lists return fields (original transcript, corrected text, confidence delta, timestamp, manual/auto). No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavioral traits.

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?

Concise, well-structured with clear sections: purpose, return fields, usage guidelines, behavior, parameter details. 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?

Complete for a one-parameter tool with an output schema. Covers purpose, usage, behavior, parameter, and return data. No gaps.

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?

Input schema has 0% coverage but description adds 'limit: max results, ordered newest-first. Range 1-100. Default 20.' Provides range, ordering, and default value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Return recent voice transcription corrections' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings by specifying use cases and not for vocabulary management.

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?

Explicitly provides 'USE WHEN' (training vocabulary, analyzing errors, debugging) and 'NOT FOR' with alternatives (add_to_vocabulary / remove_from_vocabulary).

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