C

convex-insights

by @convexv
4.6(120)

この Skill は、稼働中の Convex アプリのログとヘルス状態を自然言語で照会し、失敗・遅い/高コストな関数・デプロイ起因の3つのビューで調査します。結論は一行の発見・根拠となるログ・ダッシュボードへのディープリンクとして返され、生ログを追わずに短い対話で本番障害を切り分けられます。

observabilitylogstroubleshootingsreconvexGitHub
インストール方法
npx skills add https://github.com/convex/agent-skills --skill convex-insights
compare_arrows

Before / After 効果比較

3 组
使用前

本番でエラーが出ると、開発者は CLI オプションを思い出し、手作業でログを取得し、エディタで一行ずつ grep し、さらに関数名を推測する必要があり、1時間経っても原因が分からない。

使用後

この Skill はまず functionSpec/status で実際の関数名とデプロイ版を確認し、有界な直近ウィンドウを取得してクライアント側で絞り込み、エラー件数・代表スタック・ダッシュボード深リンクを数分で返します。

SKILL.md

Query logs + health in natural language

The deployment already records what happened; the agent just has to ask well. This capability is a disciplined wrapper over the official Convex MCP's read tools (logs, insights, functionSpec, status) that turns operational questions into narrow, evidence-returning queries and hands back answers a human can one-click verify in the dashboard. The discipline is copied from the observability MCP surface that works best in the wild: discover fields before querying, three views not fifteen tools, token-frugal output, and a dashboard deep link on every answer.

Workflow

  1. GUARD: deploy-guard step 0-1 — identify + announce which deployment is being read. Reading logs/insights is read-only; never enable prod mutation flags for an insights pass.
  2. DISCOVER before you query — never guess identifiers. Use functionSpec to list the real function names and status for the deployment/version. Note the tool limits up front: logs takes only --history <n> (a COUNT, not a time window), --success, --jsonl, --prod, --deployment — there is NO server-side status/function/requestId/time filter; insights has no function filter and is cloud dev/prod + user-auth only. So you fetch a recent window and filter CLIENT-SIDE.
  3. PICK ONE OF THREE VIEWS and fetch the raw window, then filter locally:
    • failures view → logs --history <n> --jsonl, then locally keep failures + group by function + error message, returning counts + the first stack per group. Answers 'what's erroring', 'what failed after deploy'.
    • health view → insights (cloud only): the typed 72h read-limit / OCC events. Surface + rank them, but hand perf/cost ROOT-CAUSING and fixes to convex-advisor — emit those as pointer findings, do not own the perf-fix framing here.
    • trace view → logs --history <n> --jsonl then locally filter to one requestId/function to read the full execution. Answers 'why did THIS call fail'.
  4. SCOPE by fetching a bounded recent window (a sensible --history count) and filtering client-side to the function/status/requestId asked about; when the window is large, aggregate (counts by function/message) rather than dumping lines.
  5. ANSWER with (a) the one-line finding, (b) the evidence (counts + one representative stack/log line), and (c) WHEN POSSIBLE an agent-constructed dashboard deep link (dashboard.convex.dev, the deployment's Logs/Functions view) for human verification — no tool returns the link, so build it from the deployment name + function; never a raw log dump as the answer.
  6. CROSS-CHECK deploy causality when asked 'did my deploy break this': compare the failure onset (from the log timestamps) against the deployment version from status; correlate, don't assert.
  7. HAND OFF, don't fix here: a perf/cost cause → convex-advisor (which owns those fixes); a code defect → convex-reviewer/convex-authz; a live error to react to going forward → monitor/sentinel. Emit findings on the bus (specs/finding.schema.json) — primarily observability, with perf/cost as pointer findings to advisor — so a composite pass can pick them up.

Rules

  • Discover real function/field names (functionSpec/status) before filtering — never guess identifiers, never return a confusing empty result for a name the app doesn't have.
  • logs and insights have NO server-side status/function/requestId/time-window filter (logs takes only a --history COUNT; insights is cloud-only) — fetch a bounded recent window and filter CLIENT-SIDE; say so rather than implying params that don't exist.
  • One of three views per question (failures / health / trace) — don't fan out into many speculative tool calls.
  • No tool returns a dashboard link — construct it from the deployment name + function when possible for human verification; never answer with a raw log dump.
  • Read-only always: an insights pass runs no mutation and never enables prod mutation flags (deploy-guard discipline).
  • Stay a reader and defer perf/cost fixes to convex-advisor: emit primarily observability, route perf/cost as POINTER findings so advisor uniquely owns the perf-fix framing; forward-looking reaction goes to monitor/sentinel.

ユーザーレビュー (0)

レビューを書く

効果
使いやすさ
ドキュメント
互換性

レビューなし

統計データ

インストール数35.2K
評価4.6 / 5.0
バージョン
更新日2026年10月24日
比較事例3 件

ユーザー評価

4.6(120)
5
37%
4
43%
3
13%
2
5%
1
2%

この Skill を評価

0.0

対応プラットフォーム

🤖claude-code

タイムライン

作成2026年10月17日
最終更新2026年10月24日
🎁 Agent 知識カード
アンケート