list_deployment_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds only the content scope ('committed update sets and app installs over time') but does not disclose behaviors like pagination, ordering, or result structure, which is acceptable for a simple read operation given the annotation coverage.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and resource. Every word adds value, no filler or repetition.

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 simplicity of the tool (two optional parameters, no required fields, no output schema), the description provides a basic understanding of what the tool does, but it does not explain return format or the 'limit' parameter. It is minimally viable but lacks detail for full context.

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 50% ('days' is described, 'limit' is not). The description does not mention parameters at all, leaving 'limit' completely unexplained. It provides no additional meaning beyond the schema, and with only half the schema documented, this is a clear gap.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('deployment history'), and clarifies scope with 'committed update sets and app installs over time'. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_deployments and list_update_sets, though it could be more explicit about the exact difference.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_deployments, get_deployment, or list_update_sets. The description simply states what it does without any contextual usage cues or exclusions.

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