Retrieve specific lines from a previous run by ID using a line range or regex with context, so agents can inspect only needed output without loading full text.
Show the full output of a previous run by id, a line range (e.g. '120-180'), or lines matching a regex with context.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| grep | No | Regex to search for | |
| range | No | 'A-B', 'A:', ':B' or 'A' | |
| context | No | Context lines around grep matches (default 2) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does 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 describes selection modes (range, grep with context) but omits whether the operation is read-only, whether it has side effects, permission requirements, or error behavior.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's core action and the three selection modes without any wasted words.
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?
For a 4-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate: it states what is returned ('full output') and how to filter, but lacks any safety, permission, or error-handling context that an agent might need.
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 description coverage is 75%, and the description adds meaning for all parameters: it clarifies 'id' refers to a previous run, gives a range example ('120-180'), and links 'grep' with 'context' as a combined mode. This goes slightly beyond the schema's separate descriptions.
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?
States a specific verb 'Show' and resource 'full output of a previous run', distinguishing it from siblings like read (files) and run (execution). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from outline or list, though the run-output focus is clear.
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?
Implies usage after a 'run' by requiring a run id, but provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., when to use show instead of read or outline). No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.