Get Single Query History

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about whether this is a read-only operation, what the return format looks like, pagination, rate limits, or permissions needed to access the history. For a data-retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single compact sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose and appends the prerequisite in a parenthetical. Efficient, though it could be slightly richer in guidance without becoming bloated.

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 has 7 parameters (5 required) and an output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with no annotations and no usage context beyond the query_id source, the description is adequate but leaves the agent without behavioral or eligibility guidance for a moderately complex tool.

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%, so all 7 parameters are fully documented in the schema itself. The description mentions only that query_id comes from get_popular_queries, adding marginal value over the schema's own description ('Query ID from get_popular_queries response'). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('search statistics history for a specific query'), clearly distinguishing it from the broader get_query_history sibling. It also points to get_popular_queries for obtaining the query_id, adding context that aids selection.

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?

Implies usage: retrieve history for one query obtained from get_popular_queries. References a prerequisite tool, which is good guidance, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus get_query_history or get_query_analytics.

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