vibekit_agent_history

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It simply states the action without covering important context like return format, pagination, ordering, or whether system messages are included. The limit parameter hints at pagination but the description doesn't clarify.

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 description is concise and front-loaded. Every word contributes to purpose, with no filler.

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 read operation with fully documented parameters, the description is adequate but lacks context about what constitutes the chat history (e.g., message types, ordering) and what the response contains. Given no output schema, more detail would help, but it's not severely incomplete.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning; appId and limit are well-documented in the schema, with a default for limit. No additional semantics are needed.

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 the tool retrieves chat history for an app's AI agent. The verb 'get' and resource 'chat history' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like vibekit_chat (which likely sends messages) and deploy_history.

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 usage guidelines are provided. There is no guidance on when to use this versus other agent-related tools, prerequisites (e.g., app must exist), or whether it complements vibekit_chat. The description is too terse to offer any exclusions or alternatives.

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