Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bugsnag MCP Server

Bugsnag MCP Server

by tgeselle
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

view_error

Retrieve detailed error information from Bugsnag by error ID to diagnose and resolve issues.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific error

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": {
      "error_id": "<error_id>"
    },
    "name": "view_error"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
error_idYesBugsnag error ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
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 transparency burden. It only says 'Get detailed information' without describing what information is returned, required permissions, or potential side effects, leaving the agent with limited behavioral context.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It clearly states the action and object, making it easy to parse.

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 one-parameter tool without an output schema, the description is adequate for selection and invocation. However, 'detailed information' is vague about the actual return value; without an output schema, more specificity about what details are returned would improve completeness.

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?

The input schema fully documents the single error_id parameter with a clear description ('Bugsnag error ID') at 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond that, matching the baseline for complete schema coverage.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific error'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_errors and view_event. The 'specific' qualifier makes it clear this targets a single error by ID.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like view_event or view_latest_event, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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