bill_historyRetrieve billing history from LibreNMS for a specific bill ID. Use limit and offset to control pagination and result size.
Get bill history from LibreNMS.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results to return | |
| offset | No | Number of results to skip (offset) for pagination | |
| bill_id | Yes | Bill ID. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.10.3Input schema / properties / limitAdded value: +{
+ "default": 100,
+ "description": "Maximum number of results to return",
+ "minimum": 1,
+ "type": "integer"
+}Input schema / properties / offsetAdded value: +{
+ "default": 0,
+ "description": "Number of results to skip (offset) for pagination",
+ "minimum": 0,
+ "type": "integer"
+}v1.9.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'Get,' such as pagination behavior, historical scope, or any other operational trait. It does not contradict the annotations, but it contributes no additional behavioral 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?
The description is only one short sentence with no fluff, which is concise. However, it is under-specified for the complexity of the tool and its many sibling tools, so the brevity comes at the cost of useful content. It is not poorly structured, but it does not earn a higher score due to missing contextual information.
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 that an output schema exists, return values need not be described. However, the description omits any clarifying context about what type of bill history is returned, how pagination works, or how this differs from bill_history_graph and bill_history_graph_data. An agent would struggle to select this tool reliably among the many bill-related siblings.
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%, with bill_id, limit, and offset all clearly documented in the input schema. The description itself adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema carries the burden adequately, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get bill history from LibreNMS.' It communicates what the tool does at a basic level. However, with siblings like bill_history_graph, bill_history_graph_data, and bill_get, it does not differentiate which variant of history this returns, so it lacks the distinguishing clarity needed for a 5.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bill_history_graph, bill_history_graph_data, or bill_get. The description simply states what it does without any context, exclusions, or conditions for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.