PerfLens MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

read_artifact_page

Read-onlyIdempotent

Access a stored JSON artifact page by artifact ID and type. Specify offset and limit to read up to 64 KiB, enabling paginated retrieval of large analysis results.

Instructions

Read at most 64 KiB from a stored JSON artifact.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`artifact_id`	Yes
`artifact_type`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`text`	Yes
`artifact_id`	Yes
`next_offset`	No
`total_bytes`	Yes
`artifact_type`	Yes
`schema_version`	No	1.0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.2Aug 28, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / artifact_type / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "analysis",
-  "benchmark",
-  "benchmark-comparison",
-  "collection",
-  "diagnosis",
-  "profile-comparison",
-  "project-run",
-  "trace-evidence",
-  "scheduler-analysis",
-  "off-cpu-analysis",
-  "lock-analysis"
-]New value: +[
+  "analysis",
+  "benchmark",
+  "benchmark-comparison",
+  "collection",
+  "diagnosis",
+  "profile-comparison",
+  "project-run",
+  "trace-evidence",
+  "scheduler-analysis",
+  "off-cpu-analysis",
+  "lock-analysis",
+  "container-resource-context",
+  "container-run",
+  "container-workload-spec",
+  "container-measurement",
+  "container-matched-comparison",
+  "container-module-snapshot",
+  "container-symbol-context"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Aug 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / artifact_type / enum

Added value: +[
+  "analysis",
+  "benchmark",
+  "benchmark-comparison",
+  "collection",
+  "diagnosis",
+  "profile-comparison",
+  "project-run",
+  "trace-evidence",
+  "scheduler-analysis",
+  "off-cpu-analysis",
+  "lock-analysis"
+]

First observedv0.1.0Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It usefully adds the 64 KiB cap, but it does not explain how offset/limit paging works across larger artifacts or what happens when reading past the end.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning, which is appropriate for this simple read operation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The output schema and annotations cover return values and safety, so the description does not need to repeat those. However, for a paginated artifact reader, the omission of offset/limit behavior is a meaningful gap that an agent would need to infer.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only implicitly references the limit via '64 KiB'. It does not explain artifact_id, artifact_type, or offset semantics, and the enum values in the schema are left entirely for the agent to interpret.

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?

The description clearly states a specific operation ('Read'), a concrete resource ('stored JSON artifact'), and a clear bound ('at most 64 KiB'). This is enough for an agent to distinguish it from the sibling tools, which mostly focus on collection, analysis, and optimization rather than direct artifact paging.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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. The description does not mention intended scenarios, exclusions, or how it relates to other read/inspection tools.

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

Deploy Server