Matic cleaning history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: the robot retains roughly 20 runs and older entries are sourced from a local ledger, which tells the agent about data availability and provenance.

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 dense, front-loaded sentence that leads with what is returned and then enumerates fields; no filler. The field list is long but every item is informative.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields and the retention model (about 20 runs plus local ledger). Combined with annotations, an agent has enough to call and interpret the tool, though ordering/pagination beyond 'newest first' is unspecified.

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?

The single `limit` parameter is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about the parameter or its default/maximum, but it needn't since the schema carries it.

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 resource (cleaning run history) and scope (recent runs, newest first) with an enumeration of what each run contains. An agent can tell it is a read-history tool, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like matic_status or matic_bag_report.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite or exclusion guidance. Usage must be inferred entirely from the phrase 'recent cleaning runs'.

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