[WIP] Add data-observability toolset to MCP Server docs#37963
Draft
kevinzenghu wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
[WIP] Add data-observability toolset to MCP Server docs#37963kevinzenghu wants to merge 1 commit into
kevinzenghu wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
The data-observability toolset is registered in the backend toolset registry (domains/api_platform/shared/libs/go/mcp/toolsets/registry.go) as isGA: true, clientVisible: true, with no access gate — it's already live on the public MCP endpoint (see .mcp.json's toolsets list) and its tools work today. It was simply never added to the public docs, which list toolsets alphabetically in setup.md and document them in detail in tools.md. Documents 20 tools confirmed via live MCP schema + the toolset registry: catalog search, lineage traversal/ranking/summarization, monitor coverage/status/history, entity tags/descriptions, and Spark/Databricks job health. Explicitly notes (in an alert box) that the dedicated data-observability-mcp service exposes additional tools (Databricks costs, cluster/job listings) not included here — the research surfaced at least one of those as "internal only" and couldn't confirm customer-facing status for the rest, so they're flagged for separate verification rather than guessed into a public docs page. ## Open items for the reviewer - "Permissions Required" is written as `Data Observability Read` / `Data Observability Write` by inference from Datadog's typical permission-naming convention — NOT independently confirmed against the actual RBAC permission scope names. Please confirm or correct before merging. - Confirm whether any of the data-observability-mcp-specific tools (list_integration_accounts, get_databricks_costs, list_spark_jobs, compare_job_runs, search_entity_queries) should be added — I could not verify from the registry alone which are customer-facing vs internal. AI assistance: drafted by Claude Code, grounded in the backend toolset registry (dd-source) and live MCP tool schemas; permission scope names are an inferred placeholder, explicitly flagged above.
Contributor
|
Contributor
Preview links (active after the
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
data-observabilityMCP toolset is registered in the backend as GA and client-visible (no access gate), already live on the public MCP endpoint — but was completely absent from the public MCP docs (mcp_server/setup.md's toolset list andmcp_server/tools.md's per-tool reference).Evidence
domains/api_platform/shared/libs/go/mcp/toolsets/registry.go—ToolsetDataObservability = "data-observability",isGA: true,clientVisible: true,checkAccess: nil.Open items — please confirm before merging
Data Observability Read/Writeby convention with other toolsets' naming, but did not find the literal RBAC permission scope name in what I could access. Please correct if wrong.data-observability-mcp-specific tools were deliberately excluded (Databricks costs, cluster/job listings, entity query search) — the registry research found at least one of these marked "internal only" and couldn't confirm the rest are customer-facing. Flagged in an alert box in the doc; please advise whether any should be added.Status
Work in progress — not ready for review yet. Draft, no reviewers requested.
AI assistance
Content drafted by Claude Code, grounded in the backend toolset registry and live MCP tool schemas — flagging per the AI-assistance disclosure in CONTRIBUTING.md.