app_logsRetrieve recent application logs from a Dokku app with configurable line counts (default 50, max 500). Use this read-only tool to inspect runtime output and troubleshoot issues.
Fetch recent logs for a Dokku app.
Side effects: none (read-only). Default lines=50; hard maximum is 500.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| app | Yes | ||
| lines | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly discloses read-only behavior, states there are no side effects, and reveals a hard 500-line limit—useful operational details not captured elsewhere.
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?
Two tight sentences deliver purpose, side effects, and parameter constraints. Every clause contributes information, and the key action is front-loaded.
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 low-complexity two-parameter tool, the description is nearly complete: it covers purpose, side effects, and line limits. It does not explain alternative tools or error/edge cases, but the output schema presumably covers result structure.
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?
The schema provides parameter names and defaults but no descriptions. The description adds meaning by clarifying that the target is a Dokku app, that lines has a default of 50, and that 500 is an enforced maximum.
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 action and resource: 'Fetch recent logs for a Dokku app.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on configuration or app management.
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?
The use case is implied through 'Fetch recent logs,' but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any prerequisites or context exclusions. It offers clear context, not explicit selection guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.