Get Import History

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It states 'return records' but omits key traits like pagination behavior, required app parameter, or response structure. The tool has 11 parameters, yet no behavioral context is given.

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 concise sentence. However, it lacks structure and fails to front-load critical information, such as the required parameter or tool purpose differentiation.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides minimal guidance. It doesn't address pagination, filtering, or result interpretation, making it insufficient for correct invocation.

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%, and the description does not explain any parameter meaning or usage. For example, the required 'app' enum and optional filters like 'from', 'to', 'detail', and pagination params are left entirely unexplained.

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 specifies 'import/download-folder-imported history records', clarifying the resource. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_history' or 'get_failed_history', which also return history records.

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 alternatives. Given sibling tools for different history types (e.g., failed, grab, deleted), this omission makes selection difficult.

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