arc_search_history

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds that it searches 'across local profiles,' which is useful but does not elaborate on additional behavioral traits like pagination (cursor) or handling of hidden history. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single sentence is concise but overly minimal. It front-loads the core action but omits any structure for parameter details, which should be included or referenced given the schema lacks descriptions.

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 an output schema, the description fails to cover six parameters with no schema descriptions. The agent lacks information on how to use filtering, pagination, or hidden results, making the tool insufficiently documented for effective selection and 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters but only mentions 'profiles' implicitly. Parameters like query, domain, cursor, include_hidden, and limit remain entirely unexplained, forcing the agent to rely on defaults and guesswork.

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 the tool searches 'Arc Chromium history snapshots across local profiles,' specifying both the resource (history snapshots) and scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like arc_query_tabs which operate on tabs.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus others, such as arc_query_tabs or arc_focus_space. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or alternatives, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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