list_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a genuine trait beyond structured fields – results are ordered newest first – which is useful for an agent reasoning about snapshot recency. However, it says nothing about read-only safety, result limits, pagination, or whether an empty history is possible.

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 with zero filler that front-loads the resource and appends the ordering constraint. Nothing in it is redundant with the name or schema.

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?

For a one-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description covers what is returned and in what order, which is most of what an agent needs. Minor gaps remain around result volume and whether history can be empty, but the core contract is clear.

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 100% and the single 'scene' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including fallback advice to use list_scenes. The description adds no syntax, format, or matching semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States the resource (snapshots held for a scene) and the ordering (newest first), so an agent knows this is a listing/read of snapshot history. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like snapshot_scene or restore_snapshot, but the verb/resource pairing is unambiguous.

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 on when to call this versus snapshot_scene or restore_snapshot, which are the obvious adjacent actions. The 'Use list_scenes if unsure' hint lives in the schema, not the description, and concerns parameter resolution rather than tool selection.

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