get_modal_app_history

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

Without annotations, the description only says it returns a parsed JSON dictionary of deployment history. It doesn't disclose rate limits, permissions, or error handling, but adequately describes the basic read operation.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the purpose, using structured Args/Returns sections, with no extraneous words.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to detail return values. It covers the essential input parameters and return type, though it omits edge cases or error scenarios, which is acceptable for a simple read 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 description coverage is 0%, but the description explains that app_identifier is an app name or ID and env is an optional environment target, adding meaning beyond the schema types.

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 clearly states it shows deployment history for a Modal app, specifying the CLI equivalent and distinguishing from sibling rollback_modal_app by noting its utility for finding a rollback version.

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?

It explicitly mentions the tool is useful for finding a version to pass to rollback_modal_app, providing clear context for when to use it, though it lacks when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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