get-page-history

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds pagination details, return format (segments of 20, boolean flags only when true), and error on missing title. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences that front-load purpose and key behavior (pagination, error). Every sentence adds value. No extraneous information.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, description covers return fields, pagination behavior, and error case. Does not mention rate limits or authentication, but those may be implied by API context. Adequate for agent use.

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 100%, so description adds minimal value beyond schema. Mentions mutual exclusivity of newerThan/olderThan, which is already in schema descriptions. Does not elaborate on parameter format or constraints.

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?

Clearly states it returns revision metadata (revision ID, timestamp, user, comment, size, minor flag) for a wiki page. Distinguishes from sibling tools like get-revision (single revision) and get-page (page content) by specifying it returns multiple revisions in segments of 20, newest first.

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?

Explicitly describes pagination with olderThan/newerThan parameters and mutual exclusivity. Mentions error behavior when title does not exist. Does not explicitly mention alternatives like get-revision for single revision, but the pagination description guides usage.

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