Retrieve recently generated videos with their prompts, models, and timestamps. Specify a count to control how many history entries are returned.
List recently generated videos with their prompts, models, and timestamps.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | Number of recent videos to show (default: 10, max: 50) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. 'List' conveys a read-only operation and 'recently' implies temporal ordering/filtering, but the description doesn't disclose limits, pagination, ordering guarantees, or error behavior. This is minimal but acceptable for a simple listing tool.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence states exactly what the tool does with no redundant filler. Every word earns its place.
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?
The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema), and the description covers the key return fields. Minor omissions such as explicit ordering and the relationship to list_history keep it from being fully complete, but it is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.
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% and the only parameter, count, already has a description with default and max. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics, so the 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('recently generated videos'), and specifies the returned fields (prompts, models, timestamps). This clearly distinguishes it from image-generation siblings and from the generic list_history sibling by narrowing scope to videos.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, especially list_history, which could overlap. The description states what it lists but says nothing about exclusions, prerequisites, or a decision rule between the history tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.