Skip to main content
Glama
orchestra-hq

Orchestra MCP Server

Official
by orchestra-hq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

What's Broken

whats_broken
Read-only

Identify failing and warning pipeline runs in a given window, showing failed tasks with messages, links, and duration anomalies. Excludes retries; clamps to 168 hours.

Instructions

Start here for 'what is broken' or 'why did last night's run fail'. Returns every failing and warning pipeline run in the window, already joined to the task runs that failed inside it, with each task's message, externalMessage, platformLink and duration-vs-baseline anomalies. Retried attempts are excluded. Windows wider than 168 hours are clamped to that, the widest the API serves. Follow up on a single task run with diagnose.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idNoAct on this account rather than the one the credential resolves to. Omit it to use the credential's own account. An API key is issued to a single account, so it may only name that account; an OAuth token may name any account its grant covers.
environmentNo
window_hoursNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / account_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "format": "uuid4",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Act on this account rather than the one the credential resolves to. Omit it to use the credential's own account. An API key is issued to a single account, so it may only name that account; an OAuth token may name any account its grant covers."
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds real behavioral substance beyond them: retried attempts are excluded, results include messages, externalMessage, platformLink and duration-vs-baseline anomalies, and over-wide windows are clamped server-side. It does not describe pagination or result-size limits, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the trigger questions, then the returned payload, then the exclusion rule, then the clamp, then the sibling hand-off. Four tight sentences, each carrying distinct information with no restatement of the name or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, yet the description adds the useful detail about what is joined in. The one gap is the undocumented environment parameter, which neither schema nor description explains.

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 coverage is only 33%: account_id is well documented in the schema, environment is undocumented in both places, and window_hours has a default but no schema description. The description compensates for window_hours by explaining the 168-hour clamp, but leaves environment entirely unexplained.

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?

Opens with the exact user questions it answers ('what is broken', 'why did last night's run fail') and states a specific resource: every failing and warning pipeline run in the window, joined to failed task runs. It is clearly distinguishable from diagnose, which it names as the single-task-run follow-up.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit entry-point guidance ('Start here') plus an explicit alternative ('Follow up on a single task run with diagnose'). It also states the window boundary condition (wider than 168 hours is clamped), so the agent knows the tool's limits before calling.

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