comfyui_manage_history

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows it mutates state. The description adds that it clears or deletes via POST, but does not elaborate on side effects, error conditions, or permissions beyond the annotation.

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?

Single, concise sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action and resource, and includes the HTTP method 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two actions) and the presence of an output schema (no need to explain returns), the description covers the main operations. It could mention that it is destructive (already in annotations) or that it only affects history, but it is largely complete.

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 description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. However, the schema itself has good descriptions for each parameter (clear and delete_prompt_ids), so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description implicitly references the parameters but doesn't enrich them.

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 action (clear/delete) and the resource (history), with the HTTP method and endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_history (read-only) and manage_queue (different resource).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_history for reading). The description only states what it does, not when to choose it over other tools.

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