Log10x MCP Server

Official

by log-10x

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Diff env doc vs LOG10X_* env vars

log10x_env_diff_vs_envvars

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare stored env-config against LOG10X_* environment variables and report per-field disagreements with remediation, so silent overrides are resolved.

Instructions

Compare the stored env-config document against the LOG10X_* environment variables the env-var bridge would have produced, and report per-field disagreements with remediation recommendations. Call this when the user says "but I set the env var" or downstream tools report a value the user thinks they overrode: the on-prem store wins over env vars per resolver precedence, and silent-override is the most common boot-time surprise. Args: env_id (required, env_id UUID or nickname). For each disagreeing field (env_id, nickname, cluster., destination., streamer., retriever., offload_destinations[0].), returns { field, stored, envvar, recommendation }. The recommendation tells the user to either unset the LOG10X_ env var (preferred: on-prem store is the source of truth) or to update the stored doc via the matching setter (log10x_dest_set for destination, log10x_set_gitops_repo for gitops). Pure-on-prem-store configs (no LOG10X_* env vars set) return ok:true with an empty diff and a note that no ambiguity is possible.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`env_id`	Yes	Env identifier: either the `env_id` UUID or the `nickname` from the env-config document. Resolved by walking the store chain (k8s → aws_ssm → gcp_sm → azure_ac → local).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Default
`data`	No
`tool`	Yes
`view`	No	summary
`images`	No
`actions`	No
`summary`	Yes
`warnings`	No
`truncated`	No
`next_cursor`	No
`render_hint`	No
`generated_at`	Yes
`schema_epoch`	Yes
`schema_version`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.30.8Oct 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / env_id / description

Previous value: -"Env identifier — either the `env_id` UUID or the `nickname` from the env-config document. Resolved by walking the store chain (k8s → aws_ssm → gcp_sm → azure_ac → local)."New value: +"Env identifier: either the `env_id` UUID or the `nickname` from the env-config document. Resolved by walking the store chain (k8s → aws_ssm → gcp_sm → azure_ac → local)."

First observedv1.30.7Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, not open-world), but the description adds real behavioral context: the resolver precedence rule (on-prem store wins over env vars), the silent-override failure mode, and the edge case where a pure on-prem config returns ok:true with an empty diff. This is well beyond what annotations convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose then an explicit when-to-call clause, followed by args, return shape, and the empty-diff edge case. Slightly dense, but each sentence (precedence rule, remediation routing, edge case) carries distinct value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it explains the comparison, the precedence semantics, the trigger scenario, the return field shape, and the no-ambiguity edge case. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single env_id parameter, and the description only restates that it is required and accepts a UUID or nickname — the same information the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a precise verb+resource: compare the stored env-config document against the LOG10X_* env vars the env-var bridge would have produced, and report per-field disagreements. This is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like log10x_env_validate or the setters it references.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit trigger: 'Call this when the user says "but I set the env var" or downstream tools report a value the user thinks they overrode.' It also names the alternative remediation paths (unset the env var, or use log10x_dest_set / log10x_set_gitops_repo to update the stored doc).

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

Deploy Server