hyperping

Update monitor

update_monitor

DestructiveIdempotent

Patch a monitor. Pass only fields you want to change; others are preserved.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	Target URL (http) or hostname (icmp/port/dns).
`name`	No	Human-readable monitor name.
`port`	No	TCP port — required when protocol is "port".
`uuid`	Yes	UUID of the monitor to update.
`paused`	No	Start the monitor in a paused state.
`regions`	No	Probe region codes, e.g. ["us-east","eu-west"]. Use ["*"] for all.
`timeout`	No	Request timeout in seconds (default 30).
`group_id`	No	Group to place the monitor in.
`protocol`	No	Check protocol. Defaults to "http".
`ip_version`	No	IP version used to reach the target (default 4). 6 = checked over IPv6 only, for http/port/icmp, from the selected regions that have an IPv6 probe.
`alerts_wait`	No	Minutes to wait before alerting. -1 disables, 0 is immediate.
`http_method`	No	HTTP verb. Defaults to GET.
`request_body`	No	Body for http requests.
`ssl_reminders`	No	Also remind at 30, 15, 7, 3 and 1 days below the threshold.
`dns_nameserver`	No	Custom nameserver for DNS checks.
`ssl_alert_days`	No	Days before the TLS certificate expires to alert. -1 = never.
`check_frequency`	No	Check interval in seconds. Sub-30s requires a business plan.
`dns_record_type`	No	DNS record type (protocol="dns").
`request_headers`	No	Custom request headers.
`follow_redirects`	No	Follow 3xx redirects on http monitors.
`required_keyword`	No	Body must contain this keyword, else flagged down.
`domain_alert_days`	No	Days before the domain registration expires to alert. -1 = never.
`escalation_policy`	No	UUID of an escalation policy to link.
`dns_expected_answer`	No	Expected DNS answer to assert against.
`expected_status_code`	No	Expected response status: number (200), "2xx", or "1xx-3xx".
`ssl_notify_on_change`	No	Notify when the server starts serving a different certificate.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / ip_version

Added value: +{
+  "description": "IP version used to reach the target (default 4). 6 = checked over IPv6 only, for http/port/icmp, from the selected regions that have an IPv6 probe.",
+  "enum": [
+    4,
+    6
+  ],
+  "type": "number"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / domain_alert_days

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Days before the domain registration expires to alert. -1 = never.",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / ssl_alert_days

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Days before the TLS certificate expires to alert. -1 = never.",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / ssl_notify_on_change

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Notify when the server starts serving a different certificate.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / ssl_reminders

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Also remind at 30, 15, 7, 3 and 1 days below the threshold.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedJul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description should clarify that any omitted fields are preserved (which it does) but it fails to mention that this is a destructive operation that could overwrite monitor settings, or any other behavioral traits like permission requirements or side effects.

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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the key behavioral note. It is concise but could be slightly more informative without being verbose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 26 parameters, annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what happens on success, whether the operation is atomic across fields, or any edge cases. It leaves the agent under-informed about a complex update tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 26 parameters. The description adds the important semantic that only provided fields are updated and others are preserved, which is valuable context not explicitly in the schema.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states a specific verb (patch/update) and resource (monitor), but 'Patch a monitor' is vague about what fields exist or what the tool is for beyond generic mutation. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like create_monitor or pause_monitor beyond the fact that it updates.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_monitor, pause_monitor, or resume_monitor. It says to 'pass only fields you want to change' but doesn't explain the context for using this update operation.

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

All hyperping tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Update monitor

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources