get_recent_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It adds useful constraints (time range, max results) and implies a read-only operation via the verb 'get', but it does not disclose return format, side effects, or permission requirements. This is adequate for a simple get but not fully transparent.

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 concise, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes a clean Args block. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It lacks only explicit usage guidance and ordering details, but these are minor for a simple get operation.

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?

The description explicitly explains both parameters, including their meaning (hours: lookback period; max_results: maximum return count) and defaults, fully compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves Chrome browsing history from the last N hours, using a specific verb (get) and resource (Chrome history). This distinctly differentiates it from siblings like search_chrome_history (which searches) and bookmark tools.

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?

The description implies usage (get recent history by timeframe) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over search_chrome_history or provide exclusions. A brief note about using search_chrome_history for keyword-based queries would improve clarity.

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