Skip to main content
Glama
rollbar

Rollbar MCP Server

Official
by rollbar

list-occurrences

Fetch occurrences for a Rollbar item using its counter to inspect error instances, with pagination and token-budget controls.

Instructions

List occurrences (instances) for a Rollbar item by counter

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number for pagination (default: 1)
limitNoNumber of occurrences to return (default: 3, max: 100)
counterYesRollbar item counter
last_idNoid of the last occurrence from a previous page, for cursor-based pagination. Takes precedence over page when both are provided.
projectNoProject name (optional when only one project is configured)
max_tokensNoTarget budget for the complete response, in tokens (default: 20000, minimum: 100; approx. max_tokens*4 characters). Every occurrence selected by the backend for this page is always represented, in backend order — never dropped. Each occurrence is rendered at one of four tiers depending on available budget: "full" (complete/lightly-truncated occurrence), "compact" (small diagnostic summary: level, environment, framework, language, platform, context, code_version, version, exception class/message), "id_timestamp" (id + timestamp only), or "id_only" (id only). The allocator fills the budget by upgrading occurrences tier-by-tier rather than splitting it evenly up front, so several occurrences can retain real diagnostic detail instead of all being collapsed to bare stubs. The response includes a top-level "_truncation" field describing what happened when any occurrence is below "full". The final response is bounded at max_tokens*4 characters plus a small, fixed overhead margin — never a hard byte-exact cap, but drops are never used to enforce it. If even the id_only representation cannot fit every occurrence in "limit", the call fails with an actionable error asking you to lower limit or raise max_tokens, rather than returning a silently partial page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.6.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about pagination behavior, the last_id precedence rule, budget/tiering of results, or failure modes. For a tool with this much non-obvious behavior, the single-sentence description is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, efficient, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is concise, though its brevity veers into under-specification for a tool with this much complexity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has sophisticated pagination and token-budget tiering and no output schema, so the description should explain the return shape and selection behavior. It does none of this, leaving an agent unable to anticipate the tiered results or the budget-failure error without reading the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters thoroughly; baseline is 3. The description only alludes to 'counter', adding nothing beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('List occurrences (instances) for a Rollbar item') and clarifies the ambiguous term 'occurrences' with '(instances)'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get-item-details or list-items, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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?

The description is a pure purpose statement with no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. Nothing tells the agent when to prefer this over get-item-details or get-replay.

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