list_session_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates the tool performs a read operation (returns data), but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, required permissions, or data freshness. The description only states the data source and parameters, leaving behavioral traits like idempotence or caching unaddressed.

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 structured as a compact list of parameter definitions after a clear one-line purpose statement. It is efficient with no redundant phrases, but the format is slightly inconsistent (first sentence then parameter block), which is acceptable for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description need not detail return values. It adequately covers parameters and constraints (limit bounds, optional time filters). However, it does not mention ordering, pagination beyond limit, or whether results are limited to a specific time window if since/until omitted.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all parameters: workspace and item as identifiers, limit with range and default, and since/until as ISO-8601 bounds. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema's type/default definitions, enabling an agent to correctly use each parameter.

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 clearly states 'Return completed sessions from queryinsights.exec_sessions_history', specifying both the source and the subset (completed). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_running_queries, which target ongoing sessions, and provides a clear verb-resource pairing.

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?

The description does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the term 'completed sessions' implies it is not for running sessions, there is no direct guidance or exclusion criteria provided, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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