List integrations
list_integrationsAll notification integrations in the project (Slack, Telegram, Discord, PagerDuty, OpsGenie, Teams, webhook, etc.).
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
hyperping
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that the tool lists integrations and mentions types, but it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or whether the list is complete.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is one concise sentence, front-loading the purpose and examples without any unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple list-all tool with no parameters, the description is adequate but could be more complete by contrasting with siblings or mentioning return format. It lacks guidance on when to use this versus other list/get tools.
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?
The input schema has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable as there are none. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states that the tool lists all notification integrations in the project and provides examples (Slack, Telegram, etc.), which distinguishes it from the sibling 'get_integration' that retrieves a single integration.
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?
The description implies that this tool is for listing all integrations, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'get_integration' or other list tools. No usage exclusions or context are provided.
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.
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a specific resource or action (monitor, outage, escalation policy, etc.) with clear naming. No two tools could be easily confused; even similar ones like get_monitor_outages and get_monitor_anomalies serve distinct purposes.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (create_, get_, list_, pause_, resume_, search_, update_) and use snake_case uniformly. This makes the tool set predictable and easy to navigate.
Tool Count4/5
With 26 tools, the set is slightly above the typical well-scoped range of 3-15, but each tool serves a distinct monitoring function (monitors, outages, escalations, integrations, schedules, alerts, team members). The count is reasonable for the domain.
Completeness2/5
The tool surface is heavily read-oriented, lacking create/update/delete for most resource types (escalation policies, integrations, on-call schedules, outages). Even monitors lack a delete tool. This leaves significant gaps for administrative workflows.