Tideways MCP Server

Search traces

tideways_search_traces

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find individual request traces with response time, memory, bottlenecks, and slowest layers to investigate slow or failing requests by text, time window, and response time.

Instructions

Find individual request traces (at most 30 per call, newest first unless sortBy is set) with response time, memory, bottlenecks and the slowest layers. Use to investigate specific slow or failing requests; filter by text, time window and response time.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`to`	No	Latest trace time (inclusive), "YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm" UTC; needs "from" as well
`from`	No	Earliest trace time, "YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm" UTC; needs "to" as well
`detail`	No	"concise" (default) returns a trimmed summary. "full" also includes the unmodified API response under "raw"; it can be very large.	concise
`search`	No	One whole word from the transaction name or URL path (e.g. "checkout"), matched against transaction, host and URL tokens. Several words match any of them and widen the result.
`sortBy`	No	response_time = slowest first, memory = highest first; omit for newest first. Without from/to, sorted results span all retained traces (~30 days).
`project`	No	Tideways project as "project" or "organization/project". Defaults to the defaultProject that tideways_list_projects reports; call it for valid names.
`service`	No	Service, e.g. "web" or "worker". Defaults to the configured service, else the project's default service. A project can have several services; tideways_list_services lists them. When results come back, an unknown name fails with an error.
`environment`	No	Environment, e.g. "production" or "staging". Defaults to the configured environment, else production; criteria.environment (traces: each trace's environment) shows which was used. When results come back, an unknown name fails with an error.
`withCallgraph`	No	true = only traces that have a full callgraph (profile)
`maxResponseTimeMs`	No
`minResponseTimeMs`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	Unmodified Tideways API response; present only when detail is "full".
`count`	Yes
`traces`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`limitReached`	Yes	True when 30 traces came back, the API maximum: narrow the time window or change sortBy to see others

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive. The description adds genuinely useful traits: a hard cap of 30 results per call and a default ordering (newest first unless sortBy is set). It does not mention pagination or how to retrieve results beyond the cap, so it is not exhaustive.

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 front-loaded sentences: the first covers output and the 30-cap/ordering constraint, the second covers usage and filters. No filler.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be re-explained, and the description still supplies the important operational details (result cap, ordering). For an 11-parameter, all-optional search tool this is sufficient, though the tie-in between project/service defaults and the sibling list tools is left entirely to the schema.

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 82%, so parameters are already well documented for defaults, formats and enum values (detail, sortBy). The description only restates the filter dimensions at a high level and adds no syntax or edge-case meaning 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?

States a specific verb+resource (find individual request traces) plus what it returns (response time, memory, bottlenecks, slowest layers). It is clearly distinguishable from the aggregate siblings like tideways_get_performance and tideways_get_performance_summary.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

'Use to investigate specific slow or failing requests' gives a clear use context, supplemented by the filter dimensions (text, time window, response time). It never explicitly names the aggregate alternatives to use instead when a summary is wanted, so it falls short of full when/when-not routing.

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

Deploy Server