cap_account_history_activity

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

No annotations are provided. The description mentions effects of 'detailed' but does not disclose idempotency, read-only nature, or authentication needs. The presence of an output schema partially mitigates, but behavioral context is insufficient.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and briefly mentions key parameters. No superfluous text, highly efficient.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters and an output schema, the description omits guidance on date range parameters ('from_date', 'to_date', 'last_period'), which are essential for querying history. The explanation is incomplete for a tool with moderate complexity.

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%. The description explains only 'detailed' and 'deal_id' (two of five parameters). 'from_date', 'to_date', and 'last_period' are not addressed, leaving significant gaps in parameter meaning.

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 gets account activity history, listing types (deals, orders, updates). It distinguishes from siblings like cap_account_history_transactions by focusing on broader activity.

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 explains when to use 'detailed' (for extra fields) and 'deal_id' (to filter). However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling cap_account_history_transactions or advise on time parameters.

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