bus_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'list' and 'replay' but does not disclose what 'replay' does (e.g., read messages, modify state, require authentication) or whether the operation is read-only or mutating. There is no mention of side effects or return values.

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 that is front-loaded and directly states the primary function. Every word contributes to understanding the two modes, with no fluff or repetition.

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?

Given the absence of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, this minimal description is insufficient. It does not specify return types, behavior boundaries, or the meaning of 'limit', and the 'replay' action is vague. The tool likely needs more context for correct invocation across all intended uses.

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 coverage is 0% and the description only explains the 'archive' parameter (triggers replay) but not the 'limit' parameter. The meaning of 'archive' as a room name is partially clarified, but 'limit' remains unexplained, so the description does not adequately compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 uses specific verbs ('List', 'replay') and a clear resource ('archived rooms'), and the conditional statement about 'archive' distinguishes the two modes. It does not explicitly compare to sibling tools, but the function is clear enough to differentiate from 'bus_search' or 'bus_read'.

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 explicit guidance is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives like bus_search or bus_read. The description implies listing history or replaying an archived room, but it does not state exclusions or alternative conditions, leaving the agent to infer.

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