Retrieve the latest serial log lines that match your active filter, optionally bounded by start and end times. Use it to isolate relevant device output without scanning the full log.
Read the last N lines that match the current filter.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| port | Yes | ||
| end_time | No | ||
| start_time | No | ||
| lines_count | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
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. It implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose whether reading consumes data, how buffering works, what happens if no filter is set, whether it blocks, or what the result format looks like.
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 single sentence is efficient and front-loaded, with no wasted wording. However, it is under-specified for a four-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions.
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 four parameters, one required serial port, no annotations, no parameter descriptions, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain the port requirement, time-range semantics, filter prerequisites, or return behavior, leaving important invocation details missing.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only maps loosely to lines_count via 'last N lines' and to the filter concept. It does not explain the required port parameter or the start_time and end_time parameters at all.
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 states a specific verb and resource: reading the last N lines that match the current filter. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from sibling reads such as read_received_data or read_sent_data, nor does it mention the required serial port.
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 phrase 'current filter' implies this should be used after configuring a filter, likely via set_filter. However, the description gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over read_received_data, read_sent_data, or unfiltered buffer reads.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.