Skip to main content
Glama
log-10x

Log10x MCP Server

Official
by log-10x

POC from SIEM (status)

log10x_poc_from_siem_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Track a submitted POC run's progress and retrieve the completed report in summary, full, YAML, configs, top, or pattern views.

Instructions

Retrieve progress or a view of the report from a log10x_poc_from_siem_submit run. Pass snapshot_id; optionally view to select the level of detail. In-progress responses report status (pulling / templatizing / rendering), progress_pct, step_detail, and elapsed_seconds — poll every ~30s until done. Complete responses render one of six views: summary (default, ~30 lines — exec banner + top-5 wins + views CTA), full (complete 9-section report, ~300 lines), yaml (paste-ready Receiver mute-file for the top N patterns), configs (native SIEM exclusion configs — Datadog exclusion filter / Splunk props.conf / etc.), top (expanded N-row drivers table), pattern (deep-dive on one identity — requires pattern arg). Failures include partial_report_markdown when any events were successfully pulled before the error. The full report is also written to ${LOG10X_REPORT_DIR:-/tmp/log10x-reports}/poc_from_siem-.md regardless of which view the caller requested. Snapshots live in-memory per MCP process; a restart clears them, so persist the final report path if you need it later. Unified envelope: response carries status, query_count, total_latency_ms, backend_pressure_hint, human_summary, plus the existing snapshot-lifecycle fields. Errors (unknown snapshot_id, render failure) come back as status: 'error' with a structured PrimitiveError envelope. See docs/cross-pillar-primitives.md for the agent behavior contract. Two modes, and the agent should name whichever the user's phrasing invites. This tool is the NETWORKED one: it reads the analyzer directly over the network with the caller's credentials, and the MCP mints one licence. The FENCED mode runs the same POC with no network at all — log10x_emit_sample_plan renders a read-only export script the user runs themselves, and the analysis happens in a container started with --network none, so 'cannot exfiltrate' is a kernel fact the user checks with one docker inspect rather than a claim we make. Offer it; do not ask which one first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoHow to surface the report. Default `summary` returns the v2 structured envelope (`data.result` carries the full JSON: input section with scale + methodology + coverage, output section with aggregates, incidents, per-pattern actions). The agent reads this directly and writes prose in its own voice — no rendered markdown is included in the summary path. Use `markdown` to receive the rendered 9-section markdown report (legacy / human-readable surface). `yaml` returns paste-ready receiver mute-file entries; `configs` returns native SIEM exclusion configs; `top` returns an expanded N-row drivers markdown; `pattern` deep-dives on one identity (requires `pattern` arg). `full` is kept as an alias for `markdown`.summary
top_nNoNumber of rows for views that accept it (`top`, `yaml`, `configs`, `summary`). Defaults: summary=5, top=20, yaml/configs=5.
patternNoRequired when view="pattern". The snake_case pattern identity to expand. Pass the raw identity as printed in prior views.
snapshot_idYesSnapshot id returned by log10x_poc_from_siem_submit.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
toolYes
viewNosummary
imagesNo
actionsNo
summaryYes
warningsNo
truncatedNo
next_cursorNo
render_hintNo
generated_atYes
schema_epochYes
schema_versionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.30.7

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With annotations covering the safety profile, the description still adds substantial behavioral context: in-progress field set, the six view shapes, failure partial_report_markdown behavior, the always-written report path, and critically that snapshots are in-memory per process and cleared on restart. None of this is in the annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core purpose is front-loaded and dense with useful detail, but the trailing 'two modes' paragraph is off-topic for a status tool and reads as shared boilerplate, diluting focus. Overall the text is long and heavy for what is fundamentally a polling/getter.

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 snapshot-retrieval tool with an output schema and full annotations, the description covers lifecycle (in-memory, restart clears), error envelope shape, envelope fields, and view semantics. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by tying `pattern` to the pattern view requirement and implying view-dependent behavior (top_n defaults varying by view). It largely mirrors the schema's own rich view description, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Retrieve progress or a view of the report from a log10x_poc_from_siem_submit run.' This cleanly distinguishes it from the submit sibling and the other status tools. An agent knows exactly what this does without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete usage: poll every ~30s until done, pass snapshot_id, use view to control detail level, and pattern arg required for the pattern view. It also routes to log10x_emit_sample_plan for the fenced alternative. However the 'two modes' paragraph awkwardly describes mode selection for the POC overall rather than this status tool, adding some routing ambiguity.

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