The "Confidence Gate" concept is the most interesting part here — auto-generated PRs are only useful if the fix is actually correct. What's the failure rate on the PR suggestions in practice? Do you have data on how often developers accept vs. reject the prepared PRs?

Also curious about the MCP integration — treating observability data as a tool call rather than a dashboard you have to context-switch into is a genuinely different mental model. Makes sense for agentic workflows.

The npx onboarding is clever. One-prompt install removes the biggest blocker for observability adoption (nobody wants to spend a week instrumenting their codebase).

Very good point on the confidence gate! We've rolled out feedback collection features on PRs themselves, on Slack notifications and incidents a few days ago so the data is still a bit fresh.

Anecdotally, our top clients accept 80-90% of PRs, with several clients accepting all of them and requesting an auto-merge feature. I myself accept most of Superlog PRs to Superlog. Most PRs that stay unmerged are usually due to a client losing interest in our product / abandoning the instrumented project.

Another interesting point is that not every defect is a PR. Often it's misconfiguration in an external service, so there's a special incident state for that. For example, yesterday I forgot to verify our domain on Resend so some verification emails didn't go through. Superlog pinged me on Slack and explained where to go to fix.

Super glad you like the npx onboarding and the MCP tool :) Please keep the feedback coming!