List Revisions (Outline)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds minimal context about optionally retrieving a single revision via revisionId, but does not discuss pagination behavior, return format, or API limitations.

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 very short (one sentence), but the sentence structure is awkward and could be misinterpreted. It is concise but at the expense of clarity.

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, the tool needs to describe its return value. It does not. Pagination parameters (limit, offset) imply a list response, but this is not confirmed. The optional revisionId behavior is not fully explained.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description mentions revisionId only in passing, without explaining its effect. Parameters documentId, limit, offset are not described at all.

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 'A document’s version history, or one revision with revisionId' vaguely conveys it lists revisions or retrieves a single one, but the phrasing is ambiguous. The title 'List Revisions (Outline)' is clearer but not expanded upon.

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 sibling tools like outline_get_document or outline_list_documents. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use indications.

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