Retrieve latency event history for the active instance to monitor and troubleshoot performance issues.
Get latency event history for the active instance.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| instanceId | No | Optional instance ID override |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.20.2v0.20.1v0.16.0Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falsev1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'active instance' but does not explain what constitutes the active instance or how the optional instanceId affects behavior. No detail on side effects, auth, or rate limits.
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?
The description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It could benefit from slightly more detail, but it is efficient.
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?
Given the simplicity of the tool (one optional param, no output schema), the description is adequate but lacks clarity on 'active instance' and does not mention return format or pagination.
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?
The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score is appropriate.
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 action ('get') and the resource ('latency event history'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_health' and 'get_info'.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context about the 'active instance'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.