Retrieve recent deployment logs for an app by app ID, with an optional limit to the last N lines.
Fetch recent deployment logs for an app. Optionally limit to the last N lines.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tail | No | Limit to last N lines (optional) | |
| appId | Yes | The numeric ID of the app |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state non-mutating behavior, default tail behavior, output shape, or what happens when no logs exist. It is minimal rather than misleading.
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?
The description is two short sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded and the optional limit is stated compactly.
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?
This is a simple two-parameter read tool, so the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks return-format expectations and does not clarify the relationship with pier_get_container_logs, which makes the context incomplete for optimal tool selection.
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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description restates the optional tail limit but adds no deeper semantic details such as default values, formatting, or constraints beyond the schema.
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?
The description states a specific action ('Fetch') and resource ('recent deployment logs for an app'), making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly contrast with the similar-sounding sibling pier_get_container_logs, but 'deployment logs' adds enough specificity to distinguish the domain.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given siblings such as pier_get_container_logs, an agent would benefit from explicit direction on when deployment logs are the right source. No exclusions, preconditions, or fallback guidance are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.