get_page_historyRetrieve the full version history of a page by supplying its UUID or slugId, enabling review of past edits and changes.
Lists the version history of a page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page_id | Yes | UUID or slugId of the page. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'Lists...', so it does not mention pagination, ordering, whether deleted versions are included, or any side effects. It is clearly a read operation, but behavioral details are otherwise absent.
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, focused sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, but it is also very sparse and does not use any structure to highlight key constraints or usage context.
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?
For a one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits useful context such as what the version list contains, ordering, or whether it includes the current version, which would help an agent reason about results without inspecting the output schema.
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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter with the description 'UUID or slugId of the page.' The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 ('Lists') and resource ('version history of a page'), making it clear this is a read-oriented history tool rather than a page-content getter. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_page or restore_page, but the resource is distinct enough.
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 explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_page or restore_page. The description only implies that this is for version history, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.