get_registration_history

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minimal behavioral context (retrieve by ID), which is expected but not expanded upon (e.g., no mention of error behavior or required permissions).

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It is concise but could be slightly expanded (e.g., mentioning return format or behavior) without losing efficiency.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not detail return values. However, for a retrieval tool, it could clarify that it returns a single object or what happens if the ID does not exist. The current description is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 0%, so the description should compensate. However, it only mentions 'by id' without explaining the parameter type, format, or semantics. The schema defines entry_id with anyOf string/integer, but the description adds no meaningful context.

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 ('Retrieve'), the resource ('historical registration entry'), and the unique identifier ('by id'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_registration_history' which returns multiple entries.

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 implies usage for retrieving a single historical registration by ID, contrasting with listing tools, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus other retrieval tools (e.g., get_registration_alias) or when not to use it.

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