Retrieve recent CLI commands typed across Cisco Packet Tracer devices, oldest first, with optional device and limit filters to troubleshoot configurations and audit changes.
Recent commands typed into any device CLI (PT's command log), oldest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| device | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read, so the description's main added value is the 'oldest first' ordering — useful for interpreting results. It says nothing about whether the log is bounded per device, whether limit truncates from the oldest or newest end, or how far back history goes.
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?
One tight sentence, front-loaded with the core action and parenthetically anchored to the product concept. No wasted words, though it is arguably too sparse rather than too long.
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?
With no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description leaves an agent guessing at the shape of returned commands, what device identifiers look like, and how `limit` interacts with the oldest-first ordering. For a 2-parameter retrieval tool this is under-specified.
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%, so the description must carry the parameter burden — and it doesn't. 'any device CLI' faintly implies device filtering is optional, but neither `device` (name vs. ID, null meaning all) nor `limit` (default 40, truncation direction) is explained anywhere.
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?
States a specific verb+resource: retrieving recent CLI commands from the command log, distinct from pt_cli (which executes them). The 'oldest first' ordering clarifies the read semantics. It stops short of naming a sibling, so it isn't a 5.
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 on when to use this versus pt_cli, pt_show, or pt_running_config. An agent could reasonably confuse 'recent commands typed' with re-running or inspecting current commands via pt_cli, and nothing in the description disambiguates.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.