Project Graph Timeline

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the contextual detail that the listed data is retained snapshots rather than the live graph, but it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or whether only some snapshots are retained.

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 a single sentence with no filler, and it front-loads the action and object. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only list with an output schema and strong annotations, the core invocation is clear. However, the description leaves ambiguity about what distinguishes a graph timeline from the other graph tools and what 'retained' excludes, so it is only minimally complete.

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 80%, so the parameter schema carries most of the meaning; the description adds no parameter-level detail. The 'limit' parameter is documented only via its default, which is acceptable but not enriched by the 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 names a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('retained graph snapshots'), and a scope ('for a project'). It differentiates from sibling graph tools like projects_graph_get by emphasizing retained/historical snapshots, though it never explicitly names a sibling to contrast with.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool instead of projects_graph_get, projects_graph_diff, or projects_graph_insights. The word 'retained' and the title 'Timeline' hint at historical use, but no explicit condition or alternative is provided.

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