wiki_get_history

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states core function without detailing behavior like pagination, ordering, or whether content is included. With an output schema, some details may be there, but description adds minimal transparency.

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?

Single concise sentence in Chinese, no wasted words. However, could be improved by frontloading key aspects. Structure is minimal but appropriate for a simple tool.

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?

Despite having output schema, the description lacks guidance on usage context, prerequisites, or what the returned list contains. For a tool with many siblings, more context is needed to ensure correct invocation.

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%, and description does not mention doc_id parameter or its semantics. Does not explain how to obtain doc_id or any constraints beyond type integer. Does not compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states '获取文档的历史版本列表' (get list of historical versions of a document), specifying verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like wiki_get_document (current version) and wiki_get_history_diff (diff between versions).

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Context implies use for history listing, but alternatives like wiki_get_history_diff are not mentioned. With many sibling tools, explicit guidelines would improve.

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