Query workspace API request logs to review past calls, filter by time or search terms, and sort results for auditing and usage analysis.
Query the workspace API request log. This is a read-only analytics query despite using POST.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| search | No | ||
| end_time | No | ||
| start_time | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it does add one genuinely useful disclosure: the operation is read-only despite using POST, which pre-empts a real misreading. However, it says nothing about permissions, pagination behavior, default time window, or what the log entries contain.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and immediately followed by the one non-obvious behavioral fact. Nothing is wasted.
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?
A five-parameter query tool with no annotations and no output schema needs the description to explain time-range semantics, default window, and result shape. The description covers only the POST/read-only quirk, leaving most of what an agent needs to call it correctly unstated.
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% across five parameters, and the description adds no meaning for sort, limit, search, start_time, or end_time. In particular, the epoch-millisecond time bounds and the 100/1000 limit defaults are left entirely to the schema's bare constraints.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'Query the workspace API request log.' This is clearly distinct from siblings like get_usage_report or list_generation_history, though the description never explicitly contrasts with those analytics siblings.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus get_usage_report, get_remote_usage_report, or list_generation_history, all of which are adjacent analytics tools. The agent must infer the distinction from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.