tracearr_get_user_history

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable behavioral context: cursor-based pagination and the need to pass meta.nextCursor back as the cursor. It also clarifies that history spans all accounts owned by the identity, which is non-obvious.

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 is concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no filler. It efficiently communicates the scope and pagination behavior.

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 presence of an output schema and read-only annotation, the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool does, its scope, and pagination handling. It does not describe the output shape (covered by schema) or the required id type (evident from schema), so it is sufficiently complete for invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining the cursor parameter ('Pass meta.nextCursor back as cursor') and implying that 'id' is the identity identifier. However, it does not elaborate on page_size or the exact format of id, leaving some 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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'Cursor-paginated watch history for an identity, scoped to every account it owns.' This is a specific verb+resource+scope, and the term 'user_history' alongside 'identity' distinguishes it from the sibling tracearr_get_history.

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 for fetching watch history for a specific identity, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over tracearr_get_history or tracearr_get_media_history, nor does it state any exclusions.

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