get_ticket_history

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

The description discloses the tool returns 'full change history' with 'who changed what, when', but lacks details on pagination, ordering, error behavior, or whether it requires ticket existence. With no annotations, the description partially covers behavioral traits.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no redundant words. Highly concise and efficient for an agent.

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 tool has only one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate but could provide more context (e.g., return format, pagination, or data sensitivity). It meets minimum viability but lacks completeness for a history tool.

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 100% for the single required parameter 'ticket_id'. The description adds value by specifying 'The Otobo ticket ID', clarifying the ID system beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 'Get the full change history of a ticket (who changed what, when)' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from siblings like get_ticket or search_tickets.

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 tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_ticket for current state, search_tickets for searching). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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