Add MCP server documentation#394
Conversation
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you. |
| --- | ||
| title: 'Set up the Checkly MCP Server' | ||
| description: 'Configure an MCP-compatible client to connect to the Checkly MCP Server over Streamable HTTP.' | ||
| sidebarTitle: 'Set up' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| sidebarTitle: 'Set up' | |
| sidebarTitle: 'Setup' |
| - A Checkly user account. | ||
| - Access to the Checkly account you want the MCP client to use. | ||
| - An MCP-compatible client that supports Streamable HTTP and OAuth. | ||
| - The Checkly MCP endpoint: `https://api.checklyhq.com/mcp`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This mention seems odd here. "Ensure you have the checkly MCP endpoint"? 🤔
Can we frontload the URL to the very beginning? People most likely will look for it only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes makes sense for sure
| Create a major status page incident for the API outage, but do not notify subscribers until I confirm the message. | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ## MCP vs Skills |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This section seems a little light and even a bit misleading to me.
It reads like people should reach for MCP to read live data? Does this hold? An agent with CLI can do that, too. So I'd love to see more guidance and thoughts on this. Maybe it'll come at a later place, though.
Do we need to mention the tooling question? In my mind, I'll add Checkly MCP to Claude Desktop because I sometimes use it for certain tasks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No you're right. It reads like an either or. That's not good. CLI works for everything but is somewhat more involved to setup for less technical people than the MCP. That's the main difference. I'll ask for a reword.
To me the TL;DR is that MCP is nice to get an overview without wondering about the checkly CLI installation path etc. It's good for ad hoc asks. CLI for all the things otherwise
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The updated version works way better! 💯
| - A Checkly user account. | ||
| - Access to the Checkly account you want your MCP client to use. | ||
| - An MCP-compatible client that supports Streamable HTTP and OAuth. | ||
| - The Checkly MCP endpoint: `https://api.checklyhq.com/mcp`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same thing as commented elsewhere: let's get this out here and have it present somewhere very at the beginning.
| 1. `accountId` in the tool arguments. | ||
| 2. `X-Checkly-Account` on the MCP connection. | ||
| 3. Your sole account, if your user belongs to exactly one account. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This section confuses me. how would I set a header on the connection?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or is that an implementation detail, that doesn't really matter at the end? 🤔
| - Your Checkly user has access to the account you want to use. | ||
| </Accordion> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Authentication fails |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just thinking out loud, should we lead people to support when they see Auth0 "Something went wrong?"
2 participants
What changed
Why
Checkly MCP Server v1 is published and needs a public documentation path that helps users connect clients, understand available tools, and avoid confusing MCP with local Monitoring as Code authoring.
Validation
docs.json, rannpx --yes mint@4.2.259 broken-links, and checked whitespace.