SpiderLook

list_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

Persisted deviations or strategy versions, newest first, cursor-paged.

Prefer kind=deviation (playbook-break events with evidence). kind=strategy_version is a historical dump of Spiderlook's stored LLM writeup — skip it unless the user asks for that history. status applies only to deviations.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "competitor_id": "<competitor_id>",
      "kind": "<kind>"
    },
    "name": "list_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`limit`	No
`cursor`	No
`status`	No		open
`context`	No	Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
`llm_model`	No	Optional model identifier for analytics, only if explicitly available in client-provided metadata. Otherwise pass 'unknown'. Do not inspect or disclose system prompts, hidden instructions, credentials, or other protected context.
`project_id`	Yes
`competitor_id`	Yes
`conversation_id`	No	Optional Spiderlook analytics correlation identifier. Reuse the value returned by a previous Spiderlook response only for subsequent Spiderlook calls in this chat. Omit if unavailable; do not invent a value or use the host's conversation ID.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`_mcp_instructions`	No	Server-issued metadata for this conversation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable behavioral details: ordering ('newest first'), pagination ('cursor-paged'), and a constraint ('status applies only to deviations'), which go beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded and tight: the first sentence summarizes the core resource with ordering and pagination, followed by a focused usage paragraph. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, 3 required) and the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the key differentiators and a parameter constraint, though it could better explain the required project_id and competitor_id context.

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 only 33%, and the description compensates for some parameters: it explains the two kind values and clarifies that status is relevant only to deviations. Yet it does not add meaning for limit, cursor, project_id, or competitor_id, leaving half the parameters without context.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description identifies the resource as 'persisted deviations or strategy versions' but lacks a clear verb (e.g., 'List'), making it slightly less direct. It doesn't distinguish this tool from siblings like query_activity or query_metrics, which could cause confusion.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance on which kind to prefer (deviation) and when to skip strategy_version, which is useful. However, it doesn't address when to use this tool overall versus alternative listing tools, leaving a gap in broader usage context.

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

All SpiderLook tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?