get_dataset_refresh_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the ordering behavior ('most recent first'), which is useful, but it does not explicitly state read-only safety, pagination behavior, or error conditions. The name 'get' implies a read, but no explicit safety guarantee is given.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. Every word contributes to conveying the core function and ordering, making it appropriately concise.

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 3 parameters and no annotations, yet the description is extremely sparse. It does not explain the meaning or purpose of 'top' or 'workspace_id', nor provide usage guidance. The output schema helps with return values, but the description alone is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional inference.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameter semantics. It does not mention 'dataset_id', 'top', or 'workspace_id' at all, adding no meaning beyond the schema's type and title information. This is a critical gap for correct invocation.

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 identifies the action ('Return'), the resource ('refresh history entries for a dataset'), and the ordering ('most recent first'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like refresh_dataset (which performs a refresh) and the listing tools.

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?

The description implies usage—when you need refresh history for a dataset—but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, so guidance is minimal.

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