Autonomous SRE & Distributed Incident Diagnosis MCP Server

correlate_incident_with_git

Correlate an incident timestamp and affected service with recent Git commits and deployments to identify suspect changes.

Instructions

Correlate an incident timestamp and affected service with recent Git commits and deployments to identify suspect changes.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "timestampIso": "<timestampIso>",
      "serviceName": "<serviceName>"
    },
    "name": "correlate_incident_with_git"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`serviceName`	Yes	Target microservice that experienced the incident
`timestampIso`	Yes	ISO 8601 timestamp representing the incident detection or peak time
`windowMinutes`	No	Analysis window in minutes prior to the incident timestamp (default 60)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it. It never states whether the tool is read-only or mutating, what permissions or integrations (Git provider, deployment system) are required, how far back it looks by default, or what the response contains.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the action and purpose front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it could have used its brevity budget on one clarifying behavioral note instead.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description should give some sense of what comes back (candidate commits, deploy IDs, confidence/ranking), and it does not. Given only three simple parameters the definition is serviceable but incomplete for a correlation tool whose result shape is entirely unknown.

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%, so the schema already documents timestampIso, serviceName, and windowMinutes including the 60-minute default. The description mentions timestamps, affected service, and recent commits but adds no format, timezone, or window semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ("Correlate") with clearly named resources (incident timestamp, affected service, Git commits, deployments) and states the outcome goal ("identify suspect changes"). It is distinguishable from siblings like fetch_error_traces and query_service_metrics, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for root-cause investigation of a recent incident. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this tool over fetch_error_traces or query_service_metrics, and no prerequisites (e.g., that Git/deploy data must exist or be connected) are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server