get_query_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions the tool retrieves 'history of executed queries' and returns 'a list of the last executed queries', it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, what format the queries are returned in, whether results are paginated, or if there are rate limits.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by well-organized Args and Returns sections. Every sentence earns its place, and the information is front-loaded with the core functionality stated first.

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 moderate complexity (retrieving query history), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and parameter semantics but lacks important context about behavioral traits, usage guidelines, and return format details that would be needed for optimal agent usage.

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 adds meaningful context about the single parameter beyond what the schema provides. The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explains that 'limit' represents 'Number of recent queries to return' and specifies the default value of 10, which compensates well for the schema's lack of documentation.

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's purpose as 'Get the history of executed queries' which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential sibling tools like 'show_running_queries' or 'execute_query' that might also relate to query operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of when this tool is appropriate versus other query-related tools like 'show_running_queries' or 'execute_query', nor any context about prerequisites or limitations.

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