plur_history

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds value by specifying the nature of events (event-sourced, creation, updates, etc.), which goes beyond the annotations. Does not contradict 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word adds value; no redundancy or fluff.

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 no output schema, the description lists the types of events included (creation, updates, feedback, evolution), which helps the agent understand return content. Lacks details on output structure or pagination, but limit parameter hints at control. Adequate for a read-only history tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond what schema already provides. Description does not elaborate on limit or engram_id usage beyond implicit filtering.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: viewing event-sourced history of an engram or all recent history, with specific event types (creation, updates, feedback, evolution). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like plur_recall or plur_learn.

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?

Implies usage for viewing historical events but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, such as plur_timeline. No 'when not to use' or prerequisites mentioned.

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