Tideways MCP Server

Get historical report

tideways_get_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve daily, weekly, or monthly performance reports for a past date, including requests, error rate, p95, and top transactions, to compare days or weeks.

Instructions

Daily, weekly or monthly performance report for a past date: total requests, error rate, p95, top 20 transactions by impact and a timeline. Use to compare days or weeks. A period that has not ended covers only its finished hours (pendingBuckets > 0), and today has no data until it ends; compare such periods per day or use tideways_get_performance_summary. Covers production and the project's default service only; for another environment or service use tideways_get_performance with end and minutes=1440 (one day per call).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Day to report, "YYYY-MM-DD". For week the API uses the Monday of that week, for month the 1st.
`detail`	No	"concise" (default) returns a trimmed summary. "full" also includes the unmodified API response under "raw"; it can be very large.	concise
`project`	No	Tideways project as "project" or "organization/project". Defaults to the defaultProject that tideways_list_projects reports; call it for valid names.
`granularity`	No		day

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	Unmodified Tideways API response; present only when detail is "full".
`report`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`timeline`	Yes	Hourly (UTC) for a day; daily (UTC date, max p95) for a week or month. The first and last days can be partial because the report follows the organization's calendar
`dateRange`	Yes	Report boundaries in the organization's local calendar (timeline keys are UTC)
`transactions`	Yes	Top 20 transactions by impact
`pendingBuckets`	Yes	Hours of the period not aggregated yet (zero-filled by the API, left out); when > 0, report totals cover only part of the period
`transactionCount`	Yes	Transactions in the full report; only the top 20 by impact are listed, detail "full" has all under raw.transaction_report

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv2.1.1Oct 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / dateRange / properties / end / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "description": "\"YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm\"",
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2} \\d{2}:\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / dateRange / properties / end / type
```
Removed value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]
```

addedOutput schema / properties / dateRange / properties / start / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "description": "\"YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm\"",
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2} \\d{2}:\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / dateRange / properties / start / type
```
Removed value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]
```

addedOutput schema / properties / timeline / items / properties / time / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "description": "\"YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm\"",
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2} \\d{2}:\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "description": "\"YYYY-MM-DD\"",
+    "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / timeline / items / properties / time / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

First observedv2.0.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description goes further by disclosing temporal edge behavior: unfinished periods return only completed hours (pendingBuckets > 0) and today has no data until it ends. It also scopes the call to production and the default service. It does not discuss rate limits, auth, or cost of 'full' detail beyond the schema note.

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?

Front-loaded with the payload contents, then routing, then edge cases — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The final sentence is long and packs two distinct escape hatches together, which slightly hurts scanability but every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations carry the safety profile. What remains — when the data is incomplete, what scope is covered, and where to go otherwise — is all present, making the definition complete for correct invocation.

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?

With 75% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description adds beyond it: 'Daily, weekly or monthly' implicitly documents the undescribed granularity enum, and it explains the comparison semantics of date ranges. The detail parameter is left to the schema, so it is not fully compensated but the gap is minor.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('performance report for a past date') and enumerates the payload (total requests, error rate, p95, top 20 transactions by impact, timeline). It explicitly distinguishes itself from tideways_get_performance_summary and tideways_get_performance, so an agent can route without opening schemas.

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?

Gives the positive case ('Use to compare days or weeks') and names concrete alternatives for the cases it does not serve: tideways_get_performance_summary for unfinished periods and tideways_get_performance with end + minutes=1440 for other environments/services. Exclusions and routing are both explicit.

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

Deploy Server