MCP-Server für die API-Endpunkte von Seq zur Interaktion mit Ihrem Protokollierungs- und Überwachungssystem. Dieser Server bietet umfassenden Zugriff auf die API-Funktionen von Seq über das Model Context Protocol.
get_signals - Abrufen von Signalen mit Filteroptionen
Filtern nach Eigentümer-ID
Filtern nach freigegebenen/privaten Signalen
Unterstützung für Teilübereinstimmungen
get_events - Abrufen von Ereignissen mit umfangreichen Filteroptionen
Filtern nach Signal-IDs
Benutzerdefinierte Filterausdrücke
Konfigurierbare Ereignisanzahl (maximal 50)
Flexible Zeitbereichsoptionen
Datumsbereichsfilterung
get_alert_state - Abrufen des aktuellen Status von Warnungen
signals - Auflisten aller freigegebenen Signale mit detaillierten Informationen
Signal-ID
Titel
Beschreibung
Freigabestatus
Eigentümerinformationen
Related MCP server: Overwatch MCP
Der Server erfordert die folgenden Umgebungsvariablen:
SEQ_BASE_URL (optional): Ihre Seq-Server-URL (Standard ist 'http://localhost:8080')
SEQ_API_KEY (erforderlich): Ihr Seq-API-Schlüssel
Dieses Repository enthält einen Claude-Skill für die Seq-Protokollanalyse und Vorfalluntersuchung. Sobald der MCP-Server verbunden ist, führt der Skill Claude durch strukturierte Untersuchungen – Gesundheitsprüfungen, Vorfall-Triage, Überwachung nach der Bereitstellung – und erstellt konsistente, umsetzbare Berichte.
Installieren Sie den Skill:
# From the releases page, download seq-ops.skill, then:
claude skill install seq-ops.skillOder installieren Sie ihn direkt aus diesem Repository:
npx skills add ahmad2x4/mcp-server-seqDer Skill wird automatisch aktiviert, wenn Sie Dinge fragen wie "morgendliche Gesundheitsprüfung", "etwas ist in der Produktion kaputt", "überprüfe die Protokolle auf Timeouts" oder "untersuche die PPSR-Integration".
Führen Sie den folgenden Befehl aus, um den Server hinzuzufügen:
claude mcp add --transport stdio \
--env SEQ_BASE_URL=http://localhost:5341 \
--env SEQ_API_KEY=your-api-key \
seq -- npx -y mcp-seqUm die Konfiguration mit Ihrem Team zu teilen, verwenden Sie das Flag --scope project (wird in .mcp.json gespeichert):
claude mcp add --transport stdio --scope project \
--env SEQ_BASE_URL=http://localhost:5341 \
--env SEQ_API_KEY=your-api-key \
seq -- npx -y mcp-seqWindows-Benutzer: Ersetzen Sie
npx -y mcp-seqdurchcmd /c npx -y mcp-seq, um "Connection closed"-Fehler zu vermeiden.
Überprüfen Sie, ob der Server verbunden ist, indem Sie /mcp innerhalb von Claude Code ausführen.
Fügen Sie dies zu Ihrer claude_desktop_config.json hinzu:
{
"mcpServers": {
"seq": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "mcp-seq"],
"env": {
"SEQ_BASE_URL": "your-seq-url",
"SEQ_API_KEY": "your-api-key"
}
}
}
}Abhängigkeiten installieren:
npm installServer erstellen:
npm run buildFür die Entwicklung mit automatischer Neuerstellung:
npm run devTests ausführen:
npm run test-scriptDas Tool get-events unterstützt die folgenden Zeitbereichsoptionen:
1m - Letzte Minute
15m - Letzte 15 Minuten
30m - Letzte 30 Minuten
1h - Letzte Stunde
2h - Letzte 2 Stunden
6h - Letzte 6 Stunden
12h - Letzte 12 Stunden
1d - Letzter Tag
7d - Letzte 7 Tage
14d - Letzte 14 Tage
30d - Letzte 30 Tage
Global über npm installieren:
npm install -g mcp-seqOder verwenden Sie es direkt mit npx – keine Installation erforderlich (wie in den Konfigurationsbeispielen oben gezeigt).
Da MCP-Server über stdio kommunizieren, kann das Debugging eine Herausforderung sein. Der Server implementiert eine ordnungsgemäße Fehlerbehandlung und Protokollierung für alle Vorgänge. Sie können das Testskript ausführen, um die Funktionalität zu überprüfen:
npm run test-scriptDer Server implementiert umfassende Typsicherheit unter Verwendung von:
TypeScript für statische Typüberprüfung
Zod-Schema-Validierung für Laufzeit-Typüberprüfung
Ordnungsgemäße Fehlerbehandlung und Antwortformatierung
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Retrieve and analyze a list of event filtered by parameters. Use this tool when you need to:
Investigate events that are being logged in the SEQ server
Details of each event is a structured log and can provide usefull information
Events could be information, error, debug, or critical
Analyze error patterns and frequencies
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| signal | No | Comma-separated list of signal IDs | |
| filter | No | Filter expression for events | |
| count | No | Number of events to return (max 20) | |
| fromDateUtc | No | Start date/time in UTC | |
| toDateUtc | No | End date/time in UTC | |
| range | No | Time range (e.g., 1m, 15m, 1h, 1d, 7d) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions that events are 'structured logs' and can be of types like 'information, error, debug, or critical,' but fails to specify critical details such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or whether this is a read-only operation. The description adds some context but leaves significant gaps for a tool with 6 parameters.
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 description is front-loaded with the core purpose but includes a bulleted list that repeats concepts (e.g., 'analyze error patterns' appears twice). Some sentences could be more efficient, and the structure is somewhat repetitive, though it remains reasonably focused.
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 the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and usage context but lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, and explicit sibling tool differentiation. It's adequate for basic understanding but has clear gaps for effective agent use.
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?
The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying filtering and analysis capabilities, but doesn't provide additional syntax, format details, or usage examples for parameters. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Retrieve and analyze a list of events filtered by parameters,' which specifies the verb (retrieve/analyze) and resource (events). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on events rather than alerts or signals, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.
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 description provides explicit usage scenarios (investigate logged events, analyze error patterns) and implies context (SEQ server events). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'get-alertstate' or 'get-signals,' and doesn't mention exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ownerId | No | Owner ID to filter signals by | |
| shared | No | Whether to include only shared signals (true) or private signals (false) | |
| partial | No | Whether to include partial signal matches |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0get-alertstate1 field changedInput schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falseget-events3 fields changedInput schema / properties / count / defaultPrevious value: -100New value: +20Input schema / properties / count / descriptionPrevious value: -"Number of events to return (max 100)"New value: +"Number of events to return (max 20)"Input schema / properties / count / maximumPrevious value: -100New value: +20get-alertstateget-eventsget-signalsScored across 3 tools
The tools appear to target different aspects of a Seq server (alert state, events, signals), but with only one description available for 'get-events', it's unclear how 'get-alertstate' and 'get-signals' differ in purpose. This creates some ambiguity, though the distinct names suggest separate functions.
All three tools follow a consistent 'get-[noun]' naming pattern using kebab-case, which is predictable and readable. There are no deviations in style or verb usage across the tool set.
With only 3 tools, this server feels under-scoped for a logging/monitoring domain like Seq, which typically involves more operations such as creating alerts, filtering logs, or managing signals. The count is too low to cover the apparent scope effectively.
The tool set is severely incomplete for a Seq server, lacking essential operations like creating or updating alerts, sending logs, or configuring signals. Only read-only 'get' operations are provided, which will limit agents to passive monitoring without the ability to interact or modify the system.
MCP server for AI access to SmartBear tools, including BugSnag, Reflect, Swagger, PactFlow, QTM4J.
Analytics and debugging for your MCP server — explore usage and sessions, then root-cause errors.
MCP server for the Seline Analytics API
