de en es ja ko ru zh

AppSignal MCP Server

Name: AppSignal MCP Server
Author: c20020207

by c20020207

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

mcp-appsignal

Ein MCP-Server (Model Context Protocol) zum Verbinden mit AppSignal und Abrufen von Vorfallinformationen.

Installation

npm install -g mcp-appsignal

Related MCP server: Sentry MCP Server

Verwendung

Befehlszeile

# Set environment variables
export APPSIGNAL_API_TOKEN=your-api-token
export APPSIGNAL_APP_ID=your-app-id

# Run the server
mcp-appsignal

Mit Cursor

Fügen Sie zu Ihren Cursoreinstellungen hinzu:

{
  "mcp": {
    "servers": {
      "appsignal": {
        "command": "npx",
        "args": ["mcp-appsignal"],
        "env": {
          "APPSIGNAL_API_TOKEN": "your-api-token",
          "APPSIGNAL_APP_ID": "your-app-id"
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Merkmale

Stellen Sie eine Verbindung zur GraphQL-API von AppSignal her
Holen Sie sich Vorfalldetails und Beispiele
Vorfälle auflisten und suchen
Geben Sie Eingabeaufforderungen zur Analyse von Vorfällen und zum Vorschlagen von Korrekturen an

MCP-Ressourcen

appsignal://incident/{incidentNumber} – Details zu einem bestimmten Vorfall abrufen
appsignal://incident/{incidentNumber}/sample/{sampleId?} – Holen Sie sich ein Beispiel für einen bestimmten Vorfall
appsignal://incidents - Alle Vorfälle auflisten

MCP-Tools

getIncident - Einen Vorfall nach Nummer abrufen
getIncidentSample – Ruft ein Beispiel für einen bestimmten Vorfall ab
listIncidents – Vorfälle mit optionaler Filterung auflisten

MCP-Eingabeaufforderungen

analyzeIncident - Analysieren Sie einen Vorfall und liefern Sie Erkenntnisse
suggestFixes – Schlagen Sie Korrekturen für einen Fehler vor

Lizenz

MIT

Available Tools

3 tools

getIncidentD

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`incidentNumber`	Yes

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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.

Conciseness1/5

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.

Completeness1/5

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.

Parameters1/5

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.

Purpose1/5

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.

Usage Guidelines1/5

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.

getIncidentSampleD

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`incidentNumber`	Yes
`sampleId`	No

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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.

Conciseness1/5

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.

Completeness1/5

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.

Parameters1/5

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.

Purpose1/5

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.

Usage Guidelines1/5

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.

listIncidentsD

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`state`	No

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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.

Conciseness1/5

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.

Completeness1/5

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.

Parameters1/5

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.

Purpose1/5

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.

Usage Guidelines1/5

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.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

3 tool updatesv1.0.0May 20, 2025
- First observedgetIncident
- First observedgetIncidentSample
- First observedlistIncidents

Deploy Server

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

D1.6/5.0

Scored 2026-04-18 10:00 across 3 tools

Disambiguation3/5

The tools have distinct names (getIncident, getIncidentSample, listIncidents) suggesting different purposes, but without descriptions, it's unclear how 'getIncident' and 'getIncidentSample' differ—they could overlap in retrieving incident data. The 'listIncidents' is clearly separate for listing multiple incidents.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent camelCase pattern with clear verb-noun combinations (getIncident, getIncidentSample, listIncidents). There are no deviations in naming style, making them predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

With only 3 tools, the server feels thin for an incident management domain, as it likely lacks essential operations like creating, updating, or resolving incidents. This minimal set may not support complete agent workflows, indicating an under-scoped tool surface.

Completeness2/5

Inferred from the domain (incident management), there are significant gaps: no tools for creating, updating, deleting, or resolving incidents, and no coverage for related entities like alerts or metrics. This incomplete surface will likely cause agent failures in handling full incident lifecycles.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Reddit Discussion

Related Servers

Related MCP Connectors

Sentry AOAuth
dev.sentry.mcp
Enable secure connectivity between Sentry issues and debugging data, and LLM clients, using a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server.
Monitoring Developer Tools Observability
3
Apideck MCP A
dev.apideck.mcp
Model Context Protocol server for the Apideck Unified API. Connect any MCP-compatible agent framework to 100+ accounting systems, HRIS platforms, file storage providers, and more through one integration. More information https://www.apideck.com/mcp-server
Developer Tools
42
Studex MCP ServerOAuth
io.github.itshivams
Model Context Protocol server for Studex tools, notifications, and profile integrations
Developer Tools
1
hithereiamaliff-mcp-nextcloudOAuth
ai.smithery
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Cloud Storage File Systems Workplace & Productivity
238

Related MCP Servers

MCP Sentry
Monitoring Databases
MCP-100
F
license
B
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that retrieves and analyzes Sentry.io issues, allowing users to inspect error reports, stacktraces, and debugging information from their Sentry account.
Updated a year ago (2025-07-18 09:02 UTC)
2
22
-
Sentry MCP Serverofficial
Monitoring Observability
getsentry
F
license
B
quality
F
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that lets AI assistants interact with the Sentry API to retrieve and analyze error data, manage projects, and monitor application performance.
Updated a year ago (2025-04-18 16:13 UTC)
11
12
-
Waroom MCP
RAG Systems
topotal
A
license
B
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables interaction with Waroom API to retrieve incident information and postmortem details through a standardized protocol.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-07-17 06:31 UTC)
26
16 npm
1
MIT
DevRev MCP Serverofficial
Project Management Customer Support
devrev
A
license
B
quality
Not graded
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that enables searching, retrieving, creating, and updating issues and tickets using DevRev APIs.
Updated 9 months ago (2026-01-21 14:33 UTC)
16
10
MIT

mcp-appsignal

Installation

Verwendung

Befehlszeile

Mit Cursor

Merkmale

MCP-Ressourcen

MCP-Tools

MCP-Eingabeaufforderungen

Lizenz

Available Tools

TDQS

TDQS

TDQS

Tool Schema Changelog

TDQS

Maintenance

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

MCP Sentry

Sentry MCP Serverofficial

Waroom MCP

DevRev MCP Serverofficial