move_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose two behavioral facts — completeness ("Every recorded hop", implying no truncation or paging) and sort order ("oldest first"). It does not state that it is read-only, what happens for an unknown item, or whether removed items still return history.

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 ten-word sentence with no filler, and the ordering constraint is front-loaded after the scope. It is efficiently sized for a one-parameter read tool, though the terseness pushes clarification work onto the caller.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers scope plus ordering. However, for a tool whose only parameter is undocumented in the schema, the description leaves the identifier format and read-only nature unaddressed.

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 coverage is 0% and the single required parameter 'item' is completely undocumented in the schema. The description only says "one item", adding no detail on whether the value is an ID, name, or path, nor how to obtain a valid one.

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?

"Every recorded hop for one item" states the resource (movement/hop history) and scope (a single item), and "oldest first" names the ordering. It lacks an explicit retrieval verb and does not name a contrasting sibling such as where_is, but an agent can still infer it returns the full move log for one item rather than a current location.

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 statement of when to choose this over where_is (current position) or search, and no preconditions such as whether the item must exist. The reader must infer the use case purely from the noun phrase 'recorded hop'.

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