mcp-sentry
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| auth-token | Yes | Your Sentry authentication token | |
| project-slug | Yes | Your Sentry project slug | |
| organization-slug | Yes | Your Sentry organization slug |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_sentry_issueA | Retrieve and analyze a Sentry issue by ID or URL. Use this tool when you need to: - Investigate production errors and crashes - Access detailed stacktraces from Sentry - Analyze error patterns and frequencies - Get information about when issues first/last occurred - Review error counts and status |
| get_list_issuesA | Retrieve and analyze Sentry issues by project slug. Use this tool when you need to: - Investigate production errors and crashes - Access detailed stacktraces from Sentry - Analyze error patterns and frequencies - Get information about when issues first/last occurred - Review error counts and status |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| sentry-issue | Retrieve a Sentry issue by ID or URL |
| sentry-issues-by-project | Retrieve Sentry issues by project slug |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
Both tools have nearly identical descriptions, both involving retrieving and analyzing Sentry issues. The only difference is the input parameter (project slug vs ID/URL), but the overlapping purpose and identical phrasing make it unclear which tool to use in a given scenario.
Both tools follow a 'get_' prefix with snake_case, which is consistent. However, the first tool name 'get_list_issues' is slightly awkward (could be 'get_issues_by_project') but still fits the pattern. Minor deviation from ideal naming.
With only 2 tools, the server feels underdeveloped for a comprehensive Sentry integration. While the scope is focused on retrieval, additional tools for updating or managing issues are expected. The count is borderline but not extremely low.
The tool set only covers retrieving issues by project or ID. Missing operations like updating issue status, assigning, or searching across projects create significant gaps that would hinder an agent from performing typical Sentry workflows.