PingRelay MCP Server

heartbeat_logs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get up to 100 received ping logs for a non-deleted heartbeat in the authenticated organization, newest first, including timestamps and request metadata. An existing heartbeat with no logs returns an empty list.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "heartbeatExternalId": "<heartbeatExternalId>"
    },
    "name": "heartbeat_logs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`heartbeatExternalId`	Yes	External heartbeat GUID returned as Id by HeartbeatList.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, yet the description still adds real value: a hard cap of 100 results, newest-first ordering, org scoping, the non-deleted requirement, and the empty-list outcome for a heartbeat with no pings. It does not say what happens when the heartbeat does not exist or is deleted, which is the remaining behavioral gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with the result count, scope and ordering front-loaded, followed by the empty-result edge case. Nothing is redundant or buried.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter read with no output schema, the description covers return shape (timestamps, request metadata), volume limit and the empty case. It is nearly complete; the missing piece is error behavior for an unknown or deleted heartbeat, and whether more than 100 logs are reachable at all.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents that it is the external heartbeat GUID returned as Id by HeartbeatList. The description reinforces that the referenced heartbeat must exist and be non-deleted, but adds no format or sourcing detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get up to 100 received ping logs for a non-deleted heartbeat', with scope (authenticated organization) and ordering (newest first). It is clearly distinguishable in substance from heartbeat_get and heartbeat_incidents, though it never names a sibling to contrast against.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for inspecting a heartbeat's ping history, and the 'non-deleted heartbeat' phrasing hints at a prerequisite. There is no explicit when-to-use versus heartbeat_get/heartbeat_list guidance and no stated exclusions.

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

All PingRelay MCP Server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?