wazuh-mcp

Read manager logs

wazuh_manager_logs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read and filter Wazuh manager ossec.log entries to diagnose ingestion problems, integration failures, or daemon errors by filtering log level.

Instructions

Read and filter ossec.log entries from the manager. Use this to diagnose ingestion problems, integration failures or daemon errors — filter to level='error' to see only what is broken.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tag`	No	Only entries from this daemon, e.g. 'wazuh-modulesd'.
`level`	No	Only entries at this log level.
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`search`	No	Free-text substring match in the message.
`summary`	No	Return per-daemon counts by level instead of individual lines — the fast way to see where errors are concentrated.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Description matches annotations: says 'Read' and 'filter', reinforcing read-only and idempotent behavior. No side effects implied, consistent with destructiveHint=false.

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?

One sentence with purpose, use cases, and example. Front-loaded with 'Read and filter ossec.log entries'. No fluff.

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?

Includes purpose, use cases, and an example filter. The output schema is available and no nested objects. It doesn't mention pagination, but that's in schema. For a read-only log viewer, this is sufficient.

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 provides descriptions for tag, level, search, summary (67% coverage). Limit and offset are self-explanatory. The description doesn't add extra parameter context, but the schema covers the main ones.

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 'Read and filter ossec.log entries from the manager' – clear verb and resource. Also gives specific diagnostic use cases, distinguishing it from other Wazuh tools like manager stats or config.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to diagnose ingestion problems, integration failures or daemon errors' and gives an example filter to level='error'. That is clear guidance. It doesn't mention alternatives, but the use cases are specific enough.

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