Skip to main content
Glama

get-logs

Retrieve Cloud Logging entries for your current GCP project using filters and pagination to monitor and debug applications.

Instructions

Get Cloud Logging entries for the current project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNoFilter for the log entries (see Cloud Logging query syntax)
pageSizeNoMaximum number of entries to return (default: 10)

Implementation Reference

  • Main handler for the 'get-logs' tool. Parses input arguments using Zod schema, checks if a project is selected, initializes the Google Cloud Logging client, retrieves log entries with optional filter and page size, formats the response, and handles errors.
    } else if (name === "get-logs") {
      const { filter, pageSize = 10 } = GetLogsSchema.parse(args);
      
      if (!selectedProject) {
        return createTextResponse("No project selected. Please select a project first.");
      }
    
      try {
        const logging = new Logging({
          projectId: selectedProject
        });
        const [entries] = await logging.getEntries({
          pageSize,
          filter: filter || undefined,
          orderBy: 'timestamp desc'
        });
        
        return createTextResponse(JSON.stringify({
          entries: entries.map((entry: Entry) => ({
            timestamp: entry.metadata.timestamp,
            severity: entry.metadata.severity,
            resource: entry.metadata.resource,
            textPayload: entry.data,
            jsonPayload: typeof entry.data === 'object' ? entry.data : null
          }))
        }, null, 2));
      } catch (error: any) {
        console.error('Error getting logs:', error);
        return createTextResponse(`Error getting logs: ${error.message}`);
      }
  • index.ts:194-211 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get-logs' tool in the listTools response, defining its name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: "get-logs",
      description: "Get Cloud Logging entries for the current project",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          filter: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Filter for the log entries (see Cloud Logging query syntax)",
          },
          pageSize: {
            type: "number",
            description: "Maximum number of entries to return (default: 10)",
          }
        },
        required: [],
      },
    }
  • Zod schema used for input validation of the 'get-logs' tool arguments in the handler.
    const GetLogsSchema = z.object({
      filter: z.string().optional(),
      pageSize: z.number().optional(),
    });

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses basic action but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what specific log entries are returned. No mention of response format or error conditions.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite low complexity and a complete schema, the description omits details about return values (no output schema), filter syntax (though referenced in schema), and potential constraints. Could be more complete for an agent to use confidently.

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%; both filter and pageSize have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('Cloud Logging entries'), and the scope ('for the current project'). It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get-billing-budget or list-projects.

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?

The description gives an implied usage (want logs? use this), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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