Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
arch-mcp-server

arch-mcp-server

by DankyoDev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Deduplicated errors

log_errors
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves deduplicated errors and worse from the current boot by unit and message with counts to help identify recurring failures.

Instructions

Errors and worse from the current boot, deduplicated by unit and message with counts. Use it to spot recurring failures.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "log_errors"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoGroups per page

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, closed-world, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds the genuinely useful non-annotation facts that results are grouped/deduplicated by unit and message with counts and are scoped to the current boot, but says nothing about ordering, truncation, or how paging relates to the limit.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the scope and dedup semantics, with no filler. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 simple single-parameter read tool with full annotations and complete schema coverage, the definition covers scope, dedup semantics, and a use case. Only minor gaps remain around result ordering and pagination behavior.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including default and bounds. The description adds the notion of 'groups' that the limit counts, but no format or syntax detail beyond that.

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?

Names the resource (errors and worse), the scope (current boot), and the dedup key (unit and message with counts), which is specific enough to separate it from raw log retrieval. It stops short of naming a sibling such as log_query, so differentiation is implied rather than explicit.

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?

'Use it to spot recurring failures' gives one positive use case, which is real guidance. There is no when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives, so an agent must infer that log_query is for raw, non-deduplicated logs.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools