get-slo-history

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It mentions return data (SLI values, thresholds, time range) but does not cover side effects (none expected, as read-only), rate limits, or detailed behavior like whether it aggregates data. Adequate but minimal.

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 sentences: first states the core function, second adds usage examples and output summary. No unnecessary words, front-loaded, 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?

Lacks output schema, so description should clarify return format. Mentions SLI values, thresholds, and time range, which covers key elements. For a simple historical query, this is reasonably complete, though details on data points or aggregation could improve completeness.

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?

Input schema already describes all 4 parameters with 100% coverage (e.g., 'Start time as Unix epoch seconds'). Description adds contextual usage ('Use after get-slo') but no additional parameter meaning beyond schema. Baseline 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?

Clearly states it retrieves historical SLO data over a time range, with specific example queries (e.g., 'SLO performance last 30 days'). Distinguishes from sibling 'get-slo' which gets a single SLO's details and 'get-slos' which lists SLOs.

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?

Suggests using it after get-slo, providing context for typical use cases. However, lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools (e.g., when to use search_slos instead). The guidance is helpful but not exhaustive.

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