agentleFS
FabienGreardFabienGreard/TouchGrassBar/.agents/skills/convex-insights/SKILL.md

convex-insights

Skill4 starsChanged 54 days agoMITView on GitHub

Query a running Convex app's logs + health in natural language (official MCP): failures, slow/expensive functions, deploy causality — scoped, evidence-backed, with a dashboard deep link.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    No tool returns a dashboard link — construct it from the deployment name + function when possible for human verification.

    line 30
  2. Distinctive:

    Read-only always: an insights pass runs no mutation and never enables prod mutation flags (deploy-guard discipline).

    line 31

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md
<!-- GENERATED from convex-agents content/capabilities/convex-insights.json — do not edit by hand. -->

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.

Download now (ZIP)

Trending

Steady: 0 new projects took it in the last 4 weeks, none the 4 weeks before.thin data

Week of Aug 30: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 6: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 13: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 20: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 27: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 4: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 11: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 18: 0 new projects
Aug 2026Sep 2026Oct 2026
New projects taking a version of this file each week, over the 8 weeks our latest run read: only 0 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend.

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.