get_selection_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses ordering ('newest first') and that multiple selections are returned, but says nothing about permissions, whether selections persist across sessions, or the shape of each entry.

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?

One sentence that is front-loaded with what the tool returns and ordering, then the usage cue. No filler; every clause earns its place.

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 simple, parameter-light read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, the ordering, and the motivating scenario. The main residual gap is that it doesn't hint at what constitutes one selection entry, but that is minor at this complexity.

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% — the single 'limit' parameter is already documented with its default (10) and maximum (50). The description adds no meaning beyond that, 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 a specific verb+resource ('recent element selections') plus ordering ('newest first'), so the agent knows it returns a list rather than a single item. It implicitly separates itself from the sibling get_latest_selection via 'history'/'recent' but never names that sibling explicitly, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Provides a concrete usage scenario: 'when the user clicked a few things and you need to pick the right one.' That is clear context for when to reach for this tool, but no exclusion or named alternative (e.g. get_latest_selection for the single most recent pick) is given.

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