Skip to main content
Glama

errors_list

Retrieve error verdicts and new fingerprints for a project after a release promotion. Inspect error samples with request IDs and runnable logs commands, filtered by function, kind, or time window.

Instructions

Grouped, release-baselined error memory for a project, verdict-first: every page leads with a computed promote-vs-revert verdict (the gateway's numbers — never recomputed here), then the collapsed error identities. The post-promote watch: right after an apply/promote activates a release, call errors_list with new_in set to the just-activated release id (the promote response's next_actions carries a ready-made watch_errors command for the CLI equivalent). verdict.new_fingerprints > 0 means the release introduced NEW error identities — inspect errors[] (each row has samples with request ids + a runnable logs command) and consider reverting; new_fingerprints === 0 with healthy verdict.invocations_in_window means clean under real traffic (0 errors over 0 invocations is absence of signal, not proven health). Filter by since/until/function/kind/fingerprint; pass fingerprint_id to fetch one fingerprint's full detail (all samples + also_seen_in_functions). Quality tier coarse = the function predates the error side-channel; redeploy to upgrade fidelity. Read-only, own-project service-key auth; cursors are opaque.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoRestrict to one choke-point class: uncaught | boot_crash | invoke_failed | handled_5xx.
limitNoPage size (default 50, max 200).
sinceNoISO-8601 window start. Default window is the last 24h (gateway resolves `until` − 24h).
untilNoISO-8601 window end. Defaults to now (gateway-side).
cursorNoOpaque `next_cursor` from a prior page. Returns the next page. Never parse cursors.
new_inNoA release id, or the literal "active" (gateway resolves the live release). Selects error identities FIRST seen under that release and drives the verdict's new_fingerprints / baseline — the promote-gate signal.
functionNoRestrict to one function by name.
project_idYesProject whose errors to read. Authorized with the project's OWN service key; a key for a different project gets 403, never a 404.
fingerprintNoRestrict the list to one exact fingerprint identity (`fp_…`).
fingerprint_idNoFetch ONE fingerprint's full detail (all samples, per-sample fetch_logs commands, also_seen_in_functions) instead of a page. When set, all filter params (since/until/function/kind/fingerprint/new_in/limit/cursor) are rejected.
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses read-only nature, own-project auth requirement, opaque cursors, quality tier implications, and the verdict-first grouping. It also explains the post-promote watch behavior and what different verdict values mean.

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 long but every sentence adds distinct value. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and then dives into details. It could be slightly more concise, but it is well-structured and informative.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, nuanced verdict behavior), the description thoroughly covers all aspects: filtering, pagination, watch mechanism, quality tiers, and auth constraints. An agent can fully understand how to use the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra context for key parameters like new_in (selects first-seen errors under a release), fingerprint_id (fetches full detail and rejects other filters), and project_id (authorized with project's own key, 403 vs 404). This adds meaningful value beyond the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool lists 'grouped, release-baselined error memory' with a verdict-first approach. It specifies the resource (errors) and action (list) and distinguishes it from sibling tools through unique behavior like verdicts and watch functionality.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'right after an apply/promote activates a release' with new_in parameter. Also explains when to use fingerprint_id for full detail and how to interpret verdict fields. The description covers both primary usage and alternative filtering strategies.

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/MajorTal/run402'

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