Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
goofish-cli

goofish-cli

by fancyboi999
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

message_history

Fetch full chat history for a specified conversation ID by paging through all messages, with optional limits and timeout for Goofish IM operations.

Instructions

拉取指定 cid 会话的历史消息（翻页到底）

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cid": "<cid>"
    },
    "name": "message_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cidYes
limitNo
timeoutNo
limit_per_pageNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.5.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "title": "Limit",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / timeout
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 30,
+  "title": "Timeout",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +true
    • removedOutput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "result": {
-    "items": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "title": "Result",
-    "type": "array"
-  }
-}
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "result"
-]
    • changedOutput schema / title
      Previous value: -"message_historyOutput"New value: +"message_historyDictOutput"
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one real behavioral trait beyond the schema: the call auto-paginates through all pages rather than returning a single page. It says nothing about read-only safety, rate limits, or what happens on very large histories despite a timeout parameter being present.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the key resource (cid conversation) is front-loaded. It is arguably too terse for a four-parameter tool, but there is no wasted text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required. However, for a tool with four undocumented parameters and zero annotations, the description omits pagination-control semantics, default behavior (limit=0, timeout=30s), and any guidance on choosing between this and the sibling message tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across four parameters, so the description must compensate and it largely does not. It clarifies only that cid identifies the conversation; the distinction between limit and limit_per_page, and the role of timeout, are left entirely unexplained.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: pulling historical messages for a given cid conversation. This clearly separates it from message_list_chats (list conversations) and message_watch (live streaming). It does not, however, explicitly name those siblings or contrast itself with them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus message_list_chats or message_watch, nor any prerequisites (e.g. must the cid be known/authenticated first). The parenthetical '(翻页到底)' implies a full-history fetch, but the agent must infer that.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools