Skip to main content
Glama

Resume a URL monitor

resume_monitor
Idempotent

Resumes a paused URL monitor: it’s checked at once and starts fresh.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "monitor": "<monitor>"
    },
    "name": "resume_monitor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
monitorYesThe monitor’s name, address or id

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
daysYes
nameYes
textYes
sinceYes
statusYesup, slow, down, paused or checking
changesYes
displayYes
last30DaysYes
lastChecksYesThe last 10 checks, newest first
notCheckedNo
responseMsYesThe median response time of the last 5 checks that answered, in ms
certificateYes
blockedSinceYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations cover safety (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), and the description adds genuinely new context: the monitor is checked immediately and 'starts fresh'. The freshness/reset hint is exactly the kind of behavioral detail annotations cannot convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. 'Starts fresh' is slightly colloquial and ambiguous about what state is reset, but the economy is otherwise good.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the idempotency/safety profile. The only residual gap is clarifying what 'starts fresh' resets and whether the target must already be paused.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the burden. The description adds no additional meaning about how to identify the monitor (name vs. address vs. id), which is the baseline 3 case.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Resumes a paused URL monitor'), which is unambiguous against siblings like pause_monitor, check_monitor, and get_monitor. It does not explicitly name the inverse tool, but the purpose is immediately legible.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Resumes a paused URL monitor' implies the precondition (the monitor must be paused) but never states when-not to use it or points to alternatives such as check_monitor. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources