rapid7-mcp

get_log_entry

Retrieve a single log entry by ID from a log set to support security incident analysis.

Instructions

Retrieve a specific log entry by its ID from a given log set

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "log_set_id": "<log_set_id>",
      "log_id": "<log_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_log_entry"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`log_id`	Yes	ID of the specific log entry
`log_set_id`	Yes	ID of the log set containing the entry

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 12, 2026

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 full burden. It only states the retrieval action, with no disclosure of side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error cases. For a read operation, a 2 is generous.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks detail. It is front-loaded but could offer more structure without becoming verbose.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple retrieval with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks information about return format, error handling, or expected behavior, so completeness is marginal.

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 100% and parameter descriptions are adequate. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states it retrieves a specific log entry by ID from a log set. It uses specific verb+resource, and while it distinguishes from siblings like 'search_logs' by being ID-specific, it does not explicitly differentiate from 'get_alert' or similar tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, constraints, or when not to use it. The agent receives no context about selecting this over sibling tools.

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