Skip to main content
Glama
diegofornalha

MCP Sentry para Cursor

sentry_capture_exception

Capture and send application exceptions to Sentry for error monitoring and debugging purposes.

Instructions

Capture and send an exception to Sentry

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorYesError message or description
levelNoSeverity level of the errorerror
tagsNoKey-value pairs to tag the error
contextNoAdditional context data
userNoUser information

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the 'sentry_capture_exception' tool. It extracts parameters, creates an Error object if needed, sets scope with level, tags, context, and user, then calls Sentry.captureException.
    case "sentry_capture_exception": {
      const { error, level = "error", tags, context, user } = args as any;
      
      // Create an Error object if string provided
      const errorObj = error instanceof Error ? error : new Error(error);
      
      // Create a new scope for this specific error
      Sentry.withScope((scope) => {
        scope.setLevel(mapSeverityLevel(level));
        
        if (tags) {
          Object.entries(tags).forEach(([key, value]) => {
            scope.setTag(key, value as string);
          });
        }
        
        if (context) {
          Object.entries(context).forEach(([key, value]) => {
            scope.setContext(key, value as any);
          });
        }
        
        if (user) {
          scope.setUser(user);
        }
        
        Sentry.captureException(errorObj);
      });
      
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Exception captured: ${error}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • The input schema and metadata for the 'sentry_capture_exception' tool, defining parameters like error, level, tags, context, and user.
    {
      name: "sentry_capture_exception",
      description: "Capture and send an exception to Sentry",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          error: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Error message or description",
          },
          level: {
            type: "string",
            enum: ["fatal", "error", "warning", "info", "debug"],
            description: "Severity level of the error",
            default: "error",
          },
          tags: {
            type: "object",
            description: "Key-value pairs to tag the error",
            additionalProperties: { type: "string" },
          },
          context: {
            type: "object",
            description: "Additional context data",
            additionalProperties: true,
          },
          user: {
            type: "object",
            description: "User information",
            properties: {
              id: { type: "string" },
              email: { type: "string" },
              username: { type: "string" },
            },
          },
        },
        required: ["error"],
      },
    },
  • Helper function to map string severity levels to Sentry SeverityLevel enum values, used in the handler.
    function mapSeverityLevel(level: string): Sentry.SeverityLevel {
      const severityMap: Record<string, Sentry.SeverityLevel> = {
        fatal: "fatal",
        error: "error",
        warning: "warning",
        info: "info",
        debug: "debug",
      };
      return severityMap[level] || "error";
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool captures and sends exceptions, implying a write operation to Sentry, but doesn't cover critical aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, network behavior, error responses, or whether this is a synchronous or asynchronous operation. The description is too minimal for a tool that interacts with an external monitoring service.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's appropriately front-loaded with the essential action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool that sends data to an external monitoring service with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after capture (e.g., success/failure responses, how exceptions appear in Sentry), doesn't mention authentication or permissions needed, and provides no error handling guidance. Given the complexity and lack of annotations, more context is needed.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, providing clear documentation for all 5 parameters including their types, enums, and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the action ('capture and send') and the resource ('exception to Sentry'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'sentry_capture_message', which likely captures messages rather than exceptions, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose one over the other.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sentry_capture_message' or 'sentry_add_breadcrumb'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, error handling scenarios, or integration contexts where this tool would be appropriate, leaving the agent with minimal usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/diegofornalha/sentry-mcp-cursor'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server