Retrieve messages from the last geoprocessing operation and filter by severity to review all output, warnings, or errors in ArcGIS Pro.
Messages from the most recent geoprocessing operation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| severity | No | 0 all, 1 warnings, 2 errors. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only the source and recency of messages; it does not state that the operation is read-only, whether it includes warnings/errors by default, authentication requirements, rate limits, or that only the latest operation is covered.
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 one perfectly front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the scope is immediate without requiring further parsing.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the schema fully documents the only parameter. The description still omits usage context and behavioral details, which is a notable gap given the lack of annotations, making it only minimally complete for an agent.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the single severity parameter is fully documented in the schema ('0 all, 1 warnings, 2 errors.'). The description adds no additional meaning about severity filtering or defaults, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 states the resource (messages) and a precise scope (most recent geoprocessing operation). It is far more specific than a bare 'get messages', but it does not distinguish itself from sibling diagnostic tools such as diagnose or get_capabilities.
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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives are given. However, the phrase 'most recent geoprocessing operation' implies it is intended after running a geoprocessing tool, which is at least implied usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.