delimit_drift_history

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

Transparently states 'read-only' and discloses the underlying API call (ai.drift_monitor.get_drift_history). Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden; while it could mention rate limits or caching, the key behavioral trait is covered.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action. Uses bullet points effectively for usage guidance and side effects. Minor redundancy between 'When NOT to use' and sibling contrast but overall efficient.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage scenarios, alternatives, and behavior comprehensively, leaving no obvious gaps.

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?

There is only one parameter (limit) with schema description coverage of 100%. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema's explanation of 'Max entries to return. Default 20.' Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists recent drift-check results from the drift monitor, with a specific verb ('list') and resource ('drift-check results'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool delimit_drift_check by noting it reads historical results rather than running a check.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use (investigate last detected drift and changes) and when not to use (perform a fresh drift check), with a named alternative tool (delimit_drift_check). This gives clear guidance for an AI agent to select the correct tool.

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