get_file_revisions

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

No annotations provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as required permissions, rate limits, or behavior when file has no revisions. It only implies a read operation.

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 one sentence of 6 words, which is concise but under-specified. It could include more information without being verbose.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the return format, pagination (maxResults), and error cases. It is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 'Get revision history of a file', indicating the verb and resource. Among siblings like get_file, get_file_content, get_file_permissions, it is distinct as revision history. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no exclusion criteria. The description is silent on usage context.

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