Prometheus MCP Server
The Prometheus MCP Server provides a Model Context Protocol (MCP) interface for AI assistants to interact with Prometheus metrics data. You can:
Execute PromQL Queries: Run both instant queries and range queries (with specified time ranges and step intervals)
Discover Metrics: List all available metrics and retrieve metadata for specific metrics
Get Scrape Targets: Retrieve information about all configured scrape targets
Authentication Support: Connect using Basic or Bearer token authentication
Docker Deployment: Easily deploy and run using Docker or Docker Compose
Configurable Tools: Customize available tools to optimize context window usage
Provides access to Prometheus metrics and queries, allowing execution of PromQL queries, metrics discovery and exploration, viewing instant and range query results, and retrieving target information from a Prometheus server.
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Prometheus MCP Servershow me the top 5 CPU usage metrics over the last hour"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Prometheus MCP Server
Give AI assistants the power to query your Prometheus metrics.
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides access to your Prometheus metrics and queries through standardized MCP interfaces, allowing AI assistants to execute PromQL queries and analyze your metrics data.
Getting Started
Prerequisites
Prometheus server accessible from your environment
MCP-compatible client (Claude Desktop, VS Code, Cursor, Windsurf, etc.)
Installation Methods
Add to your Claude Desktop configuration:
{
"mcpServers": {
"prometheus": {
"command": "docker",
"args": [
"run",
"-i",
"--rm",
"-e",
"PROMETHEUS_URL",
"ghcr.io/pab1it0/prometheus-mcp-server:latest"
],
"env": {
"PROMETHEUS_URL": "<your-prometheus-url>"
}
}
}
}Install via the Claude Code CLI:
claude mcp add prometheus --env PROMETHEUS_URL=http://your-prometheus:9090 -- docker run -i --rm -e PROMETHEUS_URL ghcr.io/pab1it0/prometheus-mcp-server:latestAdd to your MCP settings in the respective IDE:
{
"prometheus": {
"command": "docker",
"args": [
"run",
"-i",
"--rm",
"-e",
"PROMETHEUS_URL",
"ghcr.io/pab1it0/prometheus-mcp-server:latest"
],
"env": {
"PROMETHEUS_URL": "<your-prometheus-url>"
}
}
}The easiest way to run the Prometheus MCP server is through Docker Desktop:
Via MCP Catalog: Visit the Prometheus MCP Server on Docker Hub and click the button above
Via MCP Toolkit: Use Docker Desktop's MCP Toolkit extension to discover and install the server
Configure your connection using environment variables (see Configuration Options below)
Run directly with Docker:
# With environment variables
docker run -i --rm \
-e PROMETHEUS_URL="http://your-prometheus:9090" \
ghcr.io/pab1it0/prometheus-mcp-server:latest
# With authentication
docker run -i --rm \
-e PROMETHEUS_URL="http://your-prometheus:9090" \
-e PROMETHEUS_USERNAME="admin" \
-e PROMETHEUS_PASSWORD="password" \
ghcr.io/pab1it0/prometheus-mcp-server:latestDeploy to Kubernetes using the Helm chart from the OCI registry:
helm install prometheus-mcp-server \
oci://ghcr.io/pab1it0/charts/prometheus-mcp-server \
--version 1.1.1 \
--set prometheus.url="http://prometheus:9090"With authentication:
helm install prometheus-mcp-server \
oci://ghcr.io/pab1it0/charts/prometheus-mcp-server \
--version 1.1.1 \
--set prometheus.url="http://prometheus:9090" \
--set auth.username="admin" \
--set auth.password="secret"With a custom values file:
helm install prometheus-mcp-server \
oci://ghcr.io/pab1it0/charts/prometheus-mcp-server \
--version 1.1.1 \
-f values.yamlSee the chart values for all available configuration options.
Configuration Options
Variable | Description | Required |
| URL of your Prometheus server | Yes |
| Set to False to disable SSL verification | No |
| Set to True to disable Prometheus UI links in query results (saves context tokens) | No |
| Request timeout in seconds to prevent hanging requests (DDoS protection) | No (default: 30) |
| Username for basic authentication | No |
| Password for basic authentication | No |
| Bearer token for authentication | No |
| Path to client certificate file for mutual TLS authentication | No |
| Path to client private key file for mutual TLS authentication | No |
| Path to CA bundle file for verifying the server's TLS certificate (standard | No |
| Organization ID for multi-tenant setups | No |
| Transport mode (stdio, http, sse) | No (default: stdio) |
| Host for HTTP transport | No (default: 127.0.0.1) |
| Port for HTTP transport | No (default: 8080) |
| Enable stateless HTTP mode for multi-replica support | No (default: False) |
| Custom headers as JSON string | No |
| Prefix for all tool names (e.g., | No |
Related MCP server: Prometheus MCP Server
Available Tools
Tool | Category | Description |
| System | Health check endpoint for container monitoring and status verification |
| Query | Execute a PromQL instant query against Prometheus |
| Query | Execute a PromQL range query with start time, end time, and step interval |
| Discovery | List all available metrics in Prometheus with pagination and filtering support |
| Discovery | Get metadata for one metric or bulk metadata with optional filtering |
| Discovery | Get scrape targets, with server-side |
The list of tools is configurable, so you can choose which tools you want to make available to the MCP client. This is useful if you don't use certain functionality or if you don't want to take up too much of the context window.
Features
Execute PromQL queries against Prometheus
Discover and explore metrics
List available metrics
Get metadata for specific metrics
Search metric metadata by name or description in a single call
View instant query results
View range query results with different step intervals
Authentication support
Basic auth from environment variables
Bearer token auth from environment variables
Docker containerization support
Provide interactive tools for AI assistants
Development
Contributions are welcome! Please see our Contributing Guide for detailed information on how to get started, coding standards, and the pull request process.
This project uses uv to manage dependencies. Install uv following the instructions for your platform:
curl -LsSf https://astral.sh/uv/install.sh | shYou can then create a virtual environment and install the dependencies with:
uv venv
source .venv/bin/activate # On Unix/macOS
.venv\Scripts\activate # On Windows
uv pip install -e .Testing
The project includes a comprehensive test suite that ensures functionality and helps prevent regressions.
Run the tests with pytest:
# Install development dependencies
uv pip install -e ".[dev]"
# Run the tests
pytest
# Run with coverage report
pytest --cov=src --cov-report=term-missingWhen adding new features, please also add corresponding tests.
License
MIT
Available Tools
6 toolsexecute_queryExecute PromQL QueryCRead-onlyIdempotent
Execute a PromQL instant query against Prometheus
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ||
| time | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what is in the schema and annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, which is concise but overly terse. It could be improved with more structure while remaining short.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With 0% schema coverage and no description of parameters, the tool is incomplete for an agent. The output schema exists, but the description does not mention it or the nature of the return value.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the parameters. It fails to clarify that 'query' is the PromQL expression and 'time' is optional evaluation time.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('Execute') and the resource ('PromQL instant query against Prometheus'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'execute_range_query' which handles range queries.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'execute_range_query'. There is no mention of typical use cases or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
execute_range_queryExecute PromQL Range QueryBRead-onlyIdempotent
Execute a PromQL range query with start time, end time, and step interval
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ||
| start | Yes | ||
| end | Yes | ||
| step | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it uses PromQL with time parameters, but does not disclose potential failures, pagination, or rate limits. For a tool with rich annotations, the description adds modest extra context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently communicates the core action and key parameters.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a 4-parameter tool with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description provides adequate context. It names the parameters and states the tool's purpose. Minor gaps include lack of format details and error behavior, but overall it is mostly complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by naming the parameters (start time, end time, step interval). However, it does not specify expected formats (e.g., Unix timestamps or RFC3339) or explain the query parameter beyond 'PromQL range query', leaving ambiguity.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool executes a PromQL range query with start time, end time, and step interval. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling tool 'execute_query', which likely handles instant queries, missing an opportunity for differentiation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No usage guidance is provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., for time-range versus instant queries), nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_metric_metadataGet Metric MetadataARead-onlyIdempotent
Get metadata (type, help, unit) for metrics. Returns all metric metadata when no metric name is provided. Use filter_pattern to search metric names and descriptions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| metric | No | ||
| filter_pattern | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds that it returns all metadata when no metric is given and how to use filter_pattern. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two efficient sentences with no redundancy. The first defines purpose, the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With output schema present, description covers primary functionality. However, it omits explanation of pagination parameters (limit, offset), which could be important for large result sets. Otherwise complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains metric (optional, returns all if null) and filter_pattern (search). But it does not cover limit/offset, leaving pagination behavior unclear. Adequate but not fully compensating.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves metadata (type, help, unit) for metrics. It specifies behavior when no metric name is provided (returns all) and mentions filter_pattern for searching. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_metrics and execute_query.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit guidance on using filter_pattern to search. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_targetsGet Scrape TargetsARead-onlyIdempotent
Get information about all scrape targets
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description reinforces that it is a read operation. It adds that it returns information about all scrape targets, but does not detail what information is included. The output schema likely covers the return format.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence of 8 words, front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word is meaningful with no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with no parameters and an existing output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It states the purpose and scope (all targets). A minor gap is the lack of mention of potential pagination or limits, but the output schema likely handles that.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and no additional information is necessary.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'scrape targets', indicating it retrieves information on all scrape targets. It distinguishes from sibling tools like execute_query or get_metric_metadata which perform different operations.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use list_metrics or get_metric_metadata. It lacks explicit context or exclusions for sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
health_checkHealth CheckARead-onlyIdempotent
Health check endpoint for container monitoring and status verification
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds context about container monitoring and status verification, which aligns with annotations and provides additional behavioral clarity.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded with key information, no wasted words. Highly concise and well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given zero parameters and an existing output schema (indicated by 'has output schema: true'), the description is complete enough to understand the tool's purpose and basic behavior.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters are defined, and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline score of 4 applies since the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter details.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it is a health check endpoint for container monitoring and status verification. Specific verb and resource, and it clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like execute_query and list_metrics.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for checking system status but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or when not to use. Usage is implied by the tool's purpose and sibling context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_metricsList Available MetricsARead-onlyIdempotent
List all available metrics in Prometheus with optional pagination support
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| filter_pattern | No | ||
| refresh_cache | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description's note about pagination adds minor behavioral context but is not necessary for safety awareness. No contradictions with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence of 10 words, directly stating the purpose and key feature. No unnecessary information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description does not cover the purpose of filter_pattern or refresh_cache, nor how pagination behaves (defaults, total count). Given 4 undocumented parameters, the description is incomplete for a full understanding.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%. The description only hints at pagination (limit/offset) but does not explain filter_pattern or refresh_cache. It fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions on 4 parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states 'List all available metrics in Prometheus', specifying the exact resource and action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like execute_query and get_metric_metadata by focusing on enumeration of metrics.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description mentions optional pagination, indicating when to use pagination parameters. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_metric_metadata for detailed metric information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
6 tool updates
v1.2.2- Changed
execute_query3 fields changed- added
Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +false - removed
Input schema / properties / query / titleRemoved value: -"Query" - removed
Input schema / properties / time / titleRemoved value: -"Time"
- Changed
execute_range_query5 fields changed- added
Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +false - removed
Input schema / properties / end / titleRemoved value: -"End" - removed
Input schema / properties / query / titleRemoved value: -"Query" - removed
Input schema / properties / start / titleRemoved value: -"Start" - removed
Input schema / properties / step / titleRemoved value: -"Step"
- Changed
get_metric_metadata14 fields changed- added
Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +false - added
Input schema / properties / filter_patternAdded value: +{ + "anyOf": [ + { + "type": "string" + }, + { + "type": "null" + } + ], + "default": null +} - added
Input schema / properties / limitAdded value: +{ + "anyOf": [ + { + "type": "integer" + }, + { + "type": "null" + } + ], + "default": null +} - added
Input schema / properties / metric / anyOfAdded value: +[ + { + "type": "string" + }, + { + "type": "null" + } +] - added
Input schema / properties / metric / defaultAdded value: +null - removed
Input schema / properties / metric / titleRemoved value: -"Metric" - removed
Input schema / properties / metric / typeRemoved value: -"string" - added
Input schema / properties / offsetAdded value: +{ + "default": 0, + "type": "integer" +} - removed
Input schema / requiredRemoved value: -[ - "metric" -] - added
Output schema / properties / result / anyOfAdded value: +[ + { + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + } +] - removed
Output schema / properties / result / itemsRemoved value: -{ - "additionalProperties": true, - "type": "object" -} - removed
Output schema / properties / result / titleRemoved value: -"Result" - removed
Output schema / properties / result / typeRemoved value: -"array" - removed
Output schema / titleRemoved value: -"_WrappedResult"
- Changed
get_targets1 field changed- added
Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +false
- Changed
health_check1 field changed- added
Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +false
- Changed
list_metrics5 fields changed- added
Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +false - removed
Input schema / properties / filter_pattern / titleRemoved value: -"Filter Pattern" - removed
Input schema / properties / limit / titleRemoved value: -"Limit" - removed
Input schema / properties / offset / titleRemoved value: -"Offset" - added
Input schema / properties / refresh_cacheAdded value: +{ + "default": false, + "type": "boolean" +}
6 tool updates
v1.0.0- Changed
execute_query2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / titleRemoved value: -"execute_queryArguments" - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
execute_range_query2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / titleRemoved value: -"execute_range_queryArguments" - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
get_metric_metadata2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / titleRemoved value: -"get_metric_metadataArguments" - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "properties": { + "result": { + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "title": "Result", + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "result" + ], + "title": "_WrappedResult", + "type": "object", + "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true +}
- Changed
get_targets2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / titleRemoved value: -"get_targetsArguments" - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": { + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "type": "object" +}
- Added
health_check - Changed
list_metrics5 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / filter_patternAdded value: +{ + "anyOf": [ + { + "type": "string" + }, + { + "type": "null" + } + ], + "default": null, + "title": "Filter Pattern" +} - added
Input schema / properties / limitAdded value: +{ + "anyOf": [ + { + "type": "integer" + }, + { + "type": "null" + } + ], + "default": null, + "title": "Limit" +} - added
Input schema / properties / offsetAdded value: +{ + "default": 0, + "title": "Offset", + "type": "integer" +} - removed
Input schema / titleRemoved value: -"list_metricsArguments" - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" +}
5 tool updates
- First observed
execute_query - First observed
execute_range_query - First observed
get_metric_metadata - First observed
get_targets - First observed
list_metrics
TDQS
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: query types (instant vs range), metadata retrieval, target info, health check, and metric listing. No overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., execute_query, get_metric_metadata). No deviations.
Six tools cover the essential Prometheus operations without being excessive or insufficient. Well-scoped for the server's purpose.
Core CRUD-like operations for queries and metadata are present. Minor gaps like alert management or rule configuration are missing but not critical for the primary use case.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
Query application logs, traces, and metrics from your AI coding assistant via Foam's MCP server.
List datasets, schemas, run APL queries, and use prompts for exploration, anomalies, and monitoring.
The Cortex MCP server provides read-only access to real-time engineering context from the Cortex developer portal, allowing AI coding assistants to answer natural language questions about your organization's catalog (microservices, libraries, domains, teams, infrastructure), scorecards (engineering standards and best practices), initiatives (goals and deadlines), and Engineering Intelligence metrics. It includes tools for querying documentation, tracking personal entities, and accessing AI-assisted insights across the entire Cortex ecosystem.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA tool that enables access to Prometheus metrics data through a Model Context Protocol server, allowing interaction with monitoring data using natural language.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to query Prometheus metrics, discover available data, and analyze system performance through natural language interactions.585MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to query Prometheus metrics, monitor alerts, and analyze system health through read-only access to your Prometheus server with built-in query safety and optional AI-powered metric analysis.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to execute PromQL queries and discover metrics across multiple Prometheus tenants using the Model Context Protocol. It supports single and multi-tenant configurations with secure authentication for instant and range query analysis.MIT
Appeared in Searches
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/pab1it0/prometheus-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server