Retrieve and manage system logs securely with pagination, filtering, and sorting options. Designed for admin use in the PocketBase MCP Server for streamlined system monitoring and debugging.
Get system logs (admin only)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filter | No | Filter criteria (e.g., "level = 'error'") | |
| page | No | Page number | |
| perPage | No | Items per page (max 100) | |
| sort | No | Sort criteria (e.g., "-created", "level") |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'admin only' (a permission requirement) but lacks details on rate limits, pagination behavior beyond schema defaults, what 'system logs' includes, or error handling. For a tool with 4 parameters and no annotations, this is insufficient.
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 extremely concise with just 4 words, front-loading the core purpose and a key constraint. Every word earns its place with zero waste, making it efficient for quick understanding.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error cases, or behavioral nuances needed for effective use. The 'admin only' hint is helpful but insufficient for full contextual understanding.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without additional value.
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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('system logs'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'pb_logs_stats' which also deals with logs, missing full differentiation.
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 description provides minimal guidance with 'admin only' indicating a permission requirement, but offers no explicit when-to-use advice, no exclusions, and no alternatives. It doesn't help an agent decide between this and 'pb_logs_stats' or other logging-related tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/paullippert/pb_mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server