fastero_get_streamlit_app_logsRead the start-up log of a Streamlit app's most recent start: the file sync, pip install (including pip's own error) and Streamlit's first lines. It covers the first five minutes after a start only, is cleared at each start, and secret values in it are redacted.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| appId | Yes | A Streamlit app’s id, from fastero_list_streamlit_apps. | |
| projectId | Yes | The project’s id, from fastero_list_projects. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / appId / descriptionAdded value: +"A Streamlit app’s id, from fastero_list_streamlit_apps."Input schema / properties / projectId / descriptionAdded value: +"The project’s id, from fastero_list_projects."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only establish readOnlyHint/destructiveHint; the description adds real behavioral detail beyond them — retention window (first five minutes), that the log is cleared at every start, and that secret values are redacted. It does not disclose the failure mode when no recent start exists or a log has already been aged out.
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 sentence that front-loads what is read and follows with the scoping and safety constraints; every clause (contents, time window, clearing, redaction) carries information an agent needs.
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 usefully characterizes what the returned text will contain and how it is bounded. It is nearly complete, missing only what the agent sees when there is no recent start or the log has been emptied.
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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters already document their source (fastero_list_streamlit_apps, fastero_list_projects). The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 verb (Read) and resource (the start-up log of a Streamlit app's most recent start), and enumerates the log's contents (file sync, pip install including pip errors, Streamlit's first lines). This scopes it away from the adjacent siblings get_streamlit_app (metadata) and get_python_run_log (a different runtime).
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?
Clearly frames the applicable context: it covers the first five minutes after a start and the log is cleared at each start, which effectively tells the agent when this tool is useful versus futile. It stops short of naming an alternative for older starts or a different diagnostic tool, so no explicit when-not/alternative routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.