Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
BeeL MCP server

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_get_request_log

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the full headers and bodies of a request made with any of your API keys in the environment, using its request ID and an optional timestamp to find older logs.

Instructions

Returns the full detail (bodies and headers) of a request made by you, with any of your API keys in this environment — including one made with a key other than the one you are authenticating with, because the axis is the person, not the individual credential.

  • {account_id}: authorizes the call; it does not widen what you can see.

  • 404: the request does not exist, was made by another user (including another user of this same account), or belongs to the other environment.

  • The widest read logs:read opens: it returns the bodies and headers that any key of yours exchanged in this environment, so a key holding only logs:read reads the traffic of your privileged keys too. It never crosses to another user or to another account. Grant it accordingly.

BeeL API endpoint: GET /v1/accounts/{account_id}/request-logs/{request_id} (reference: https://docs.beel.es)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>",
      "request_id": "<request_id>"
    },
    "name": "beel_get_request_log"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timestampNoLog timestamp (the one returned by the list). Narrows the search window around that instant so the detail also works for logs older than the default window. If omitted, the default recent window is searched.
account_idYesAccount the call is authorized against. It does not widen the result set.
request_idYesCorrelation identifier (X-Request-Id).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations by disclosing what is actually returned (request bodies and headers, i.e. potentially sensitive payloads) and that visibility is scoped to the person across all their API keys, not the individual credential. The explicit warning that a key holding only logs:read can read the traffic of privileged keys is exactly the kind of privilege-escalation context an agent needs before calling.

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-loads the core statement of what is returned before the bullet list of authorization and 404 details, which is the right order. There is mild redundancy — 'never crosses to another user or to another account' repeats the 404 bullet's 'made by another user' — but nothing is wasted enough to obscure the content.

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?

For a read-only, three-parameter detail fetch with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, permission requirements, visibility scope, failure modes, and the underlying endpoint plus docs reference. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and to anticipate why a 404 might occur.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, and the description largely restates the schema's own note that account_id 'does not widen the result set'. No additional parameter meaning (e.g. how request_id relates to X-Request-Id, or how timestamp interacts with the default window) is added beyond the schema text.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: it returns 'the full detail (bodies and headers) of a request', clearly the single-request counterpart to a list operation. The distinction from the list tool is implied by 'full detail' and singular 'a request' rather than stated by name, so it falls just short of perfect sibling differentiation.

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?

Gives concrete conditions for success and failure: a 404 means the request does not exist, belongs to another user (even within the same account), or lives in the other environment. It also explains that {account_id} authorizes the call but does not widen visibility. It never explicitly routes the agent to beel_list_request_logs to obtain a request_id first (that hint only appears in the schema's timestamp field).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools