get_scenario_run_history

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

No annotations are present, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It does not state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention any limits, pagination, or ordering behavior. The minimal description fails to disclose key aspects beyond the basic action.

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 a single short sentence that efficiently states the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and there is no superfluous text. However, it could be slightly more informative without harming conciseness.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, 2 required, and no output schema. The description fails to mention what the run history includes (e.g., fields returned), how the 'limit' parameter affects results, or any ordering. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but it does not need to since schema already defines 'project_key', 'scenario_id', and 'limit' clearly.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'run history' qualified by 'for a scenario', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_recent_runs' and 'get_scenario_logs' by specifying 'run history' as the subject.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_recent_runs' or 'get_scenario_logs'. There are no scenarios or prerequisites mentioned, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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