Get Deleted History

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, permission requirements, or side effects. The description is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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, but it is under-specified and does not earn its place by adding useful information beyond the name. It is too brief to be helpful.

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 complexity of 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It does not address pagination, filtering, or what 'deleted history' means in the application context.

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% for 11 parameters, and the description provides no explanation of any parameter. The user gets no help understanding 'app', 'from', 'to', 'page', 'limit', 'cursor', 'detail', 'fields', 'groupBy', 'pageSize', or 'sampleRecords'.

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 'Return deleted history records' states the basic action and resource, but it does not differentiate from sibling history tools like get_failed_history, get_grab_history, etc. It is clear but lacks specificity to distinguish it.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus similar history tools. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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