
Exploring MCP Tool Quality
FreeAnalyze and improve the reliability of MCP tool calls.
Free · Opens the source repo
What Exploring MCP Tool Quality does
The Exploring MCP Tool Quality skill provides developers and data analysts with the ability to investigate the performance metrics of tools invoked via PostHog's MCP analytics SDK. By analyzing the emitted $mcp_tool_call events, users can assess various metrics such as error rates, latency, and tool reach. This skill is particularly useful for those managing or developing applications that rely on these tools, as it highlights which tools may be underperforming or failing altogether.
When a user queries which MCP tool has the highest error rate or seeks a tool-quality matrix, this skill leverages the underlying data structure of PostHog’s event table. Each tool's performance can be evaluated without the need for complex SQL queries, thanks to the provided workflows that streamline the process. For instance, users can easily retrieve statistics on tool failures, latency percentiles, and overall reliability, allowing for informed decision-making regarding tool usage and optimization.
This skill is ideal for teams working with PostHog's analytics who need to ensure that their tools are functioning optimally. By utilizing the built-in queries and workflows, users can quickly identify issues and trends over time, making it easier to maintain high standards of tool performance. The skill also provides direct links to the PostHog dashboard for visual verification of the data, further enhancing the analysis process.
However, it is important to note that the skill is designed specifically for PostHog's MCP analytics environment and may not be applicable for other analytics frameworks. Users should also familiarize themselves with the effective tool naming conventions and data types to ensure accurate querying and reporting.
When to use it
Use this skill when you need to analyze the performance of MCP tools and understand their error rates and latency.
When not to use it
This skill is not suitable for environments outside of PostHog's MCP analytics framework or when detailed custom SQL queries are needed.
What you can build with it
Identifying High Error Rate Tools
Quickly find out which MCP tool has the highest error rate to address reliability issues.
Evaluating Tool Latency
Analyze the latency percentiles of various tools to optimize performance.
Generating Tool Quality Reports
Create comprehensive reports on tool performance metrics for team review.
How to install Exploring MCP Tool Quality
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add posthog/posthog/exploring-mcp-tool-quality --agent claude-code2. Or install it manually
Download the skill folder and drop it into ~/.claude/skills/ for all projects, or .claude/skills/ to scope it to one repo. Restart Claude Code so it picks up the new skill.
Anthropic's agentic coding CLI, and the reference implementation of Agent Skills. Drop a skill folder into ~/.claude/skills and Claude Code loads it automatically whenever a task matches the skill's description. Claude Code docs
Inside SKILL.md
Written by posthogExploring MCP tool quality
Any MCP server instrumented with PostHog's MCP analytics SDK emits a
$mcp_tool_call event on the shared events table every time an agent invokes a
tool. There is no dedicated ClickHouse table — every field lives as a
$mcp_* property on events, and every tool-quality metric (error rate, latency
percentiles, reach) is an aggregation over this one event. This is the data
behind the MCP analytics dashboard and tool-quality screens.
For a single tool, prefer the typed tools — posthog:query-mcp-tool-stats (calls,
errors, p50/p95, users, sessions, intents), posthog:query-mcp-tool-failures (top error
messages by harness), and posthog:query-mcp-tool-daily-stats (day-by-day trend). Each
takes a toolName + dateRange, runs the same query runner as the tool-detail
UI, and is gated behind the mcp-analytics flag — no hand-written SQL needed.
HogQL via posthog:execute-sql is the path for cross-tool questions — the
"which tool errors most" ranking below has no typed tool, so rank with SQL, then
drill into the worst tool with posthog:query-mcp-tool-stats and
posthog:query-mcp-tool-failures. The full
property schema and the canonical query recipes live in the shared MCP data
reference:
products/posthog_ai/skills/querying-posthog-data/references/models-mcp.md.
That reference is the single source of truth for the $mcp_* schema and the
effective-tool-name idiom used below — this skill inlines only the headline
"which tool errors most" query for convenience; pull the matrix, latency, and
harness recipes from the reference rather than re-deriving them. Read it before
writing queries.
The two rules that matter most
-
Always use the effective tool name. New-SDK events wrap the real tool in a single-exec call, so grouping on raw
$mcp_tool_namecollapses everything under the wrapper. Use:coalesce(nullIf(toString(properties.$mcp_exec_tool_call_name), ''), toString(properties.$mcp_tool_name)) -
Always read
$mcp_is_errorviatoBool(...)and cast$mcp_duration_msviatoFloat(...). The properties are strings.
Always set a time range — these queries scan events otherwise.
Workflow: which tool has the highest error rate
This is the canonical "which tool errors most" question. Rank tools by error
rate, but guard against small-sample noise with a HAVING floor on call volume:
posthog:execute-sql
SELECT
coalesce(nullIf(toString(properties.$mcp_exec_tool_call_name), ''), toString(properties.$mcp_tool_name)) AS tool,
count() AS total_calls,
countIf(toBool(properties.$mcp_is_error)) AS errors,
round(countIf(toBool(properties.$mcp_is_error)) * 100.0 / count(), 1) AS error_rate_pct
FROM events
WHERE event = '$mcp_tool_call'
AND coalesce(nullIf(toString(properties.$mcp_exec_tool_call_name), ''), toString(properties.$mcp_tool_name)) != ''
AND timestamp >= now() - INTERVAL 30 DAY
GROUP BY tool
HAVING total_calls >= 20
ORDER BY error_rate_pct DESC, total_calls DESC
LIMIT 20
Report both rate and volume — a 100% error rate over 3 calls is rarely the
real story; a 12% rate over 50,000 calls is. Offer to pull the top
$mcp_error_message values for the worst tool (see below).
Workflow: tool-quality matrix
One row per tool with error rate, latency percentiles, and reach — mirrors the tool-quality screen. The ready-to-run query is in models-mcp.md under "Tool-quality matrix".
Workflow: why is a tool failing
For one tool's top failure buckets (grouped by harness), call
posthog:query-mcp-tool-failures with the toolName — it's the typed equivalent of the
query below. Failures come from the same source as the error rate: errored
$mcp_tool_call events ($mcp_is_error), scoped by the effective tool name. Failures are
grouped by $mcp_error_type (a semantic bucket: internal, validation, api_4xx,
api_5xx, permission, timeout, rate_limited, missing_context) and the HTTP
$mcp_error_status when present. To see individual errored calls inside a bucket — with
the captured $mcp_error_message, session id, harness, and intent — pass the bucket's raw
error_type/error_status to posthog:query-mcp-tool-failure-occurrences
($mcp_error_message is empty on events captured before message capture shipped):
posthog:execute-sql
SELECT
concat(
coalesce(nullIf(toString(properties.$mcp_error_type), ''), 'unknown'),
if(empty(coalesce(toString(properties.$mcp_error_status), '')), '',
concat(' (HTTP ', coalesce(toString(properties.$mcp_error_status), ''), ')'))
) AS failure,
count() AS n
FROM events
WHERE event = '$mcp_tool_call'
AND toBool(properties.$mcp_is_error)
AND coalesce(nullIf(toString(properties.$mcp_exec_tool_call_name), ''), toString(properties.$mcp_tool_name)) = '<tool>'
AND timestamp >= now() - INTERVAL 30 DAY
GROUP BY failure ORDER BY n DESC LIMIT 10
$mcp_error_type is only populated on newer SDK/server paths — a chunk of errored calls
carry neither type nor status and fall into the unknown bucket.
Workflow: slowest tools
Swap the aggregate for latency percentiles
(quantile(0.95)(toFloat(properties.$mcp_duration_ms))) and order by p95_ms.
The matrix query already returns p50_ms / p95_ms.
Constructing UI links
- Dashboard:
https://app.posthog.com/project/<project_id>/mcp-analytics/dashboard - Tool quality:
https://app.posthog.com/project/<project_id>/mcp-analytics/tool-quality
Always surface a UI link so the user can verify visually.
Tips
- Report error rate and call volume together; a
HAVING total_calls >= Nfloor stops tools with very few calls from topping the list spuriously - Exclude errored calls from latency percentiles only when asked — failed calls are often the slow ones, and dropping them hides the problem
$mcp_client_namelets you cut quality by harness (Claude Code vs Cursor vs …); the canonical bucketingmultiIfis in models-mcp.md- Harness bucketing is resolved server-side by
products/mcp_analytics/backend/mcp_harness.py— that's the source of truth, andposthog:query-mcp-harness-breakdownruns it. If your hand-written SQL disagrees with the screen, your bucketing has drifted frommcp_harness.py; prefer the typed tool over re-deriving it
Related skills
exploring-mcp-sessions— drill into a single agent run and its tool sequenceexploring-mcp-intent-clusters— group agent goals and see which intents drive the errors
Frequently asked questions about Exploring MCP Tool Quality
Similar skills
WinMD API Search
Easily find and explore Windows desktop APIs.
WebMCPify
Transform any web app into an agent-ready platform.
Phoenix Tracing
Instrument LLM applications with OpenInference tracing.
Foundry Hosted Agent CopilotKit
Guidance for developing agentic web apps on Azure.
Power Automate Foundation
Connect AI agents to Power Automate seamlessly.
Power Automate Flow Builder
Efficiently build and deploy Power Automate flows programmatically.
