Skip to main content
Glama
honeycombio
by honeycombio

get_instrumentation_help

Get guidance for instrumenting code with OpenTelemetry traces and logs. Provides advice on improving existing instrumentation or creating new telemetry.

Instructions

Provides important guidance for how to instrument code with OpenTelemetry traces and logs. It is intended to be used when someone wants to instrument their code, or improve instrumentation (such as getting advice on improving their logs or tracing, or creating new instrumentation). It is BEST used after inspecting existing code and telemetry data to understand some operational characteristics. However, if there is no telemetry data to read from Honeycomb, it can still provide guidance on how to instrument code.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
languageNoProgramming language of the code to instrument
filepathNoPath to the file being instrumented

Implementation Reference

  • The main execution logic for the 'get_instrumentation_help' tool. It retrieves a predefined instrumentation guidance template, customizes it with the provided language and filepath parameters, and returns it formatted as tool content. Errors are handled via handleToolError.
    handler: async (params: z.infer<typeof InstrumentationGuidanceSchema>) => {
      try {
        // Get the instrumentation guidance template
        const guidance = getInstrumentationGuidance();
        
        const language = params?.language || "your code";
        const filepath = params?.filepath
          ? ` for ${params.filepath}`
          : "";
          
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `# Instrumentation Guidance for ${language}${filepath}\n\n${guidance}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return handleToolError(error, "get_instrumentation_help");
      }
    }
  • Zod schema defining the optional input parameters 'language' and 'filepath' for the tool.
    export const InstrumentationGuidanceSchema = z.object({
      language: z.string().optional().describe("Programming language of the code to instrument"),
      filepath: z.string().optional().describe("Path to the file being instrumented")
    });
  • The tool is instantiated via createInstrumentationGuidanceTool and added to the array of tools registered with the MCP server in the registerTools function.
    createInstrumentationGuidanceTool(api)
  • Helper function that returns the static string template containing OpenTelemetry instrumentation guidance, which is used by the tool handler.
    export function getInstrumentationGuidance(): string {
      return INSTRUMENTATION_GUIDANCE;
    }
  • The tool name is defined here in the returned tool object.
    name: "get_instrumentation_help",
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool's function as providing guidance/advice, which implies it's informational and non-destructive. However, it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured vs. narrative output, or handles errors. The description adds some context about telemetry data dependency but lacks comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is appropriately sized (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds value: the first states the purpose, the second specifies use cases, and the third provides contextual advice. There's no redundant information, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for use cases).

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (advice generation with 2 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and usage context but lacks details on output format, error handling, or dependencies. Without annotations or output schema, the description should do more to compensate, but it provides a basic operational understanding.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('language' and 'filepath'). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain how these parameters affect the guidance, whether they're optional or required in practice, or provide examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't compensate further.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Provides important guidance for how to instrument code with OpenTelemetry traces and logs.' It specifies the verb ('provides guidance') and resource ('instrument code'), and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on instrumentation advice rather than data analysis or listing operations. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential similar tools not in the sibling list.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context on when to use it: 'when someone wants to instrument their code, or improve instrumentation' and 'BEST used after inspecting existing code and telemetry data.' It also mentions a fallback scenario ('if there is no telemetry data... it can still provide guidance'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/honeycombio/honeycomb-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server