list_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool shows 'parameters and output files' but does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond what's in schema, or data freshness. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

One sentence of 20 words, extremely concise. Front-loaded with the key action 'List generation history'. Every word earns its place. No 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?

The tool has 4 optional filters, no output schema, and lists potentially complex history. The description notes it shows 'parameters and output files' but omits other likely fields like timestamps, status, user, etc. Without an output schema, more detail is needed for a complete understanding.

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 description coverage is 100% (all parameters have descriptions). The description adds context that the tool shows 'recent...operations with their parameters and output files', but this adds marginal value beyond the schema which already describes each parameter clearly.

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?

Description clearly states 'List generation history' with specific verb and resource, and mentions the types of operations (image generation, editing, transformation). It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like get_history_by_uuid (which gets a single entry) and list_jobs (different scope).

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. No explicit conditions, prerequisites, or mentions of when not to use it. Sibling tools include get_history_by_uuid, list_jobs, etc., but no comparative advice is given.

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