omv-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

container_logs

Fetch the recent log entries from a running container. Specify the container name and optionally the number of trailing lines to review.

Instructions

Last tail lines of a container's logs.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "container_logs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`tail`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must describe behavior. It discloses that only the last `tail` lines are returned, not the full log, but omits details such as whether both stdout/stderr are included, whether the container must be running, and error behavior.

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, short sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. There is no filler or redundant information, making it highly concise.

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 log-fetching tool, the description is adequate but sparse. It does not mention output format or preconditions, and it does not provide guidance relative to sibling tools. The presence of an output schema mitigates the lack of return-value detail, but overall context is thin.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It clarifies that `tail` is a line count ('Last `tail` lines'), but it only implicitly defines `name` via 'container's logs'. This partially compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 identifies the action and resource: returning the last `tail` lines of a container's logs. It distinguishes from sibling service_logs by specifying 'container', though it does not explicitly compare itself to alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: fetch recent log lines for a container. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like service_logs or docker_exec, nor 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.