Read an Event's revision history in commit order, paging with limit and after to retrieve older changes. Use an Event ID from the directory or a receipt.
Read the history of an Event: its Revisions in commit order. Page with limit and after (pass next).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| eventId | Yes | An Event id from the directory or a receipt. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description goes further by disclosing entries are returned in commit order and that paging is cursor-based via 'pass next', which hints at a next-cursor in the response. It stops short of describing the response payload or default page size.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by pagination mechanics. No filler or redundancy.
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 simple read-only tool with no output schema and only three parameters, the description covers purpose, ordering, and pagination adequately. Minor gaps (default limit, cursor expiration) remain but are not blockers for correct 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?
Schema coverage is only 33%, with 'after' and 'limit' undocumented in the schema, so the description must carry them. It does clarify their role: 'limit' sets page size and 'after' carries the cursor ('pass next'), adding real meaning beyond the bare string/integer types.
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: reading an Event's revision history in commit order. A sibling like event_undo_revision is distinguishable by its mutating name, though the description never explicitly contrasts itself with siblings.
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?
Usage is implied by the subject matter (inspect past versions), and pagination mechanics are given. However there is no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings such as event_get_protocol or event_search, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.